aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/ipc
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorNick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>2009-12-16 00:47:29 (GMT)
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2009-12-16 15:20:09 (GMT)
commit9cad200c7686708b326520a45dd680a4147568a6 (patch)
tree76a3299679ef23c945e9371f330559d6bc3d0a43 /ipc
parentbf17bb717759d50a2733a7a8157a7c4a25d93abc (diff)
ipc/sem.c: sem use list operations
Replace the handcoded list operations in update_queue() with the standard list_for_each_entry macros. list_for_each_entry_safe() must be used, because list entries can disappear immediately uppon the wakeup event. Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com> Cc: Pierre Peiffer <peifferp@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'ipc')
-rw-r--r--ipc/sem.c75
1 files changed, 31 insertions, 44 deletions
diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c
index cb0070e..d377b3a 100644
--- a/ipc/sem.c
+++ b/ipc/sem.c
@@ -403,58 +403,45 @@ undo:
*/
static void update_queue (struct sem_array * sma)
{
- int error;
- struct sem_queue * q;
+ struct sem_queue *q, *tq;
+
+again:
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(q, tq, &sma->sem_pending, list) {
+ int error;
+ int alter;
- q = list_entry(sma->sem_pending.next, struct sem_queue, list);
- while (&q->list != &sma->sem_pending) {
error = try_atomic_semop(sma, q->sops, q->nsops,
q->undo, q->pid);
/* Does q->sleeper still need to sleep? */
- if (error <= 0) {
- struct sem_queue *n;
+ if (error > 0)
+ continue;
- /*
- * Continue scanning. The next operation
- * that must be checked depends on the type of the
- * completed operation:
- * - if the operation modified the array, then
- * restart from the head of the queue and
- * check for threads that might be waiting
- * for semaphore values to become 0.
- * - if the operation didn't modify the array,
- * then just continue.
- * The order of list_del() and reading ->next
- * is crucial: In the former case, the list_del()
- * must be done first [because we might be the
- * first entry in ->sem_pending], in the latter
- * case the list_del() must be done last
- * [because the list is invalid after the list_del()]
- */
- if (q->alter) {
- list_del(&q->list);
- n = list_entry(sma->sem_pending.next,
- struct sem_queue, list);
- } else {
- n = list_entry(q->list.next, struct sem_queue,
- list);
- list_del(&q->list);
- }
+ list_del(&q->list);
- /* wake up the waiting thread */
- q->status = IN_WAKEUP;
+ /*
+ * The next operation that must be checked depends on the type
+ * of the completed operation:
+ * - if the operation modified the array, then restart from the
+ * head of the queue and check for threads that might be
+ * waiting for semaphore values to become 0.
+ * - if the operation didn't modify the array, then just
+ * continue.
+ */
+ alter = q->alter;
+
+ /* wake up the waiting thread */
+ q->status = IN_WAKEUP;
- wake_up_process(q->sleeper);
- /* hands-off: q will disappear immediately after
- * writing q->status.
- */
- smp_wmb();
- q->status = error;
- q = n;
- } else {
- q = list_entry(q->list.next, struct sem_queue, list);
- }
+ wake_up_process(q->sleeper);
+ /* hands-off: q will disappear immediately after
+ * writing q->status.
+ */
+ smp_wmb();
+ q->status = error;
+
+ if (alter)
+ goto again;
}
}

Privacy Policy