diff options
| author | Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> | 2015-02-22 19:31:41 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2015-02-24 08:44:16 +0100 |
| commit | 4d3199e4ca8e6670b54dc5ee070ffd54385988e9 (patch) | |
| tree | 5529bcb16c3217c02416e0d17d7c28f277c63581 /kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | |
| parent | 2ae79026818e7d49fead82b79b1a543e3b9c8a23 (diff) | |
| download | linux-4d3199e4ca8e6670b54dc5ee070ffd54385988e9.tar.bz2 | |
locking: Remove ACCESS_ONCE() usage
With the new standardized functions, we can replace all
ACCESS_ONCE() calls across relevant locking - this includes
lockref and seqlock while at it.
ACCESS_ONCE() does not work reliably on non-scalar types.
For example gcc 4.6 and 4.7 might remove the volatile tag
for such accesses during the SRA (scalar replacement of
aggregates) step:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58145
Update the new calls regardless of if it is a scalar type,
this is cleaner than having three alternatives.
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1424662301.6539.18.camel@stgolabs.net
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 10 |
1 files changed, 5 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c index e4ad019e23f5..06e2214edf98 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c +++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c @@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ static inline bool rwsem_try_write_lock(long count, struct rw_semaphore *sem) */ static inline bool rwsem_try_write_lock_unqueued(struct rw_semaphore *sem) { - long old, count = ACCESS_ONCE(sem->count); + long old, count = READ_ONCE(sem->count); while (true) { if (!(count == 0 || count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)) @@ -304,9 +304,9 @@ static inline bool rwsem_can_spin_on_owner(struct rw_semaphore *sem) return false; rcu_read_lock(); - owner = ACCESS_ONCE(sem->owner); + owner = READ_ONCE(sem->owner); if (!owner) { - long count = ACCESS_ONCE(sem->count); + long count = READ_ONCE(sem->count); /* * If sem->owner is not set, yet we have just recently entered the * slowpath with the lock being active, then there is a possibility @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static bool rwsem_optimistic_spin(struct rw_semaphore *sem) goto done; while (true) { - owner = ACCESS_ONCE(sem->owner); + owner = READ_ONCE(sem->owner); if (owner && !rwsem_spin_on_owner(sem, owner)) break; @@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ struct rw_semaphore __sched *rwsem_down_write_failed(struct rw_semaphore *sem) /* we're now waiting on the lock, but no longer actively locking */ if (waiting) { - count = ACCESS_ONCE(sem->count); + count = READ_ONCE(sem->count); /* * If there were already threads queued before us and there are |