-
Tony Breeds authored
Currently, we can hit a nasty case with optimistic spinning on mutexes: CPU A tries to take a mutex, while holding the BKL CPU B tried to take the BLK while holding the mutex This looks like a AB-BA scenario but in practice, is allowed and happens due to the auto-release on schedule() nature of the BKL. In that case, the optimistic spinning code can get us into a situation where instead of going to sleep, A will spin waiting for B who is spinning waiting for A, and the only way out of that loop is the need_resched() test in mutex_spin_on_owner(). This patch fixes it by completely disabling spinning if we own the BKL. This adds one more detail to the extensive list of reasons why it's a bad idea for kernel code to be holding the BKL. Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: <stable@kernel.org> LKML-Reference: <20100519054636.GC12389@ozlabs.org> [ added an unlikely() attribute to the branch ] Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
fd6be105