lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Revert "locking/mutex: Complain upon mutex API misuse in IRQ contexts"

* Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> wrote:

> This ended up causing some noise in places such as rxrpc running in softirq.
>
> The warning is misleading in this case as the mutex trylock and unlock
> operations are done within the same context; and therefore we need not
> worry about the PI-boosting issues that comes along with no single-owner
> lock guarantees.
>
> While we don't want to support this in mutexes, there is no way out of
> this yet; so lets get rid of the WARNs for now, as it is only fair to
> code that has historically relied on non-preemptible softirq guarantees.
> In addition, changing the lock type is also unviable: exclusive rwsems
> have the same issue (just not the WARN_ON) and counting semaphores
> would introduce a performance hit as mutexes are a lot more optimized.
>
> This reverts commit 5d4ebaa87329ef226e74e52c80ac1c62e4948987.

Not sure where that SHA1 came from (it's not in Linus's tree), the right
one is:

a0855d24fc22: ("locking/mutex: Complain upon mutex API misuse in IRQ contexts")

I've fixed the changelog accordingly.

Thanks,

Ingo

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-11 00:28    [W:0.067 / U:0.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site