From e7904a28f5331c21d17af638cb477c83662e3cb6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter Zijlstra Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2015 19:25:08 +0200 Subject: locking/lockdep, sched/core: Implement a better lock pinning scheme The problem with the existing lock pinning is that each pin is of value 1; this mean you can simply unpin if you know its pinned, without having any extra information. This scheme generates a random (16 bit) cookie for each pin and requires this same cookie to unpin. This means you have to keep the cookie in context. No objsize difference for !LOCKDEP kernels. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Mike Galbraith Cc: Paul E. McKenney Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/sched/rt.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'kernel/sched/rt.c') diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c index 19e13060fcd5..68deaf901a12 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c @@ -1524,7 +1524,7 @@ static struct task_struct *_pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq) } static struct task_struct * -pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev) +pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct pin_cookie cookie) { struct task_struct *p; struct rt_rq *rt_rq = &rq->rt; @@ -1536,9 +1536,9 @@ pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev) * disabled avoiding further scheduler activity on it and we're * being very careful to re-start the picking loop. */ - lockdep_unpin_lock(&rq->lock); + lockdep_unpin_lock(&rq->lock, cookie); pull_rt_task(rq); - lockdep_pin_lock(&rq->lock); + lockdep_repin_lock(&rq->lock, cookie); /* * pull_rt_task() can drop (and re-acquire) rq->lock; this * means a dl or stop task can slip in, in which case we need -- cgit v1.2.3