On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:02:44PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, so after having not thought about this, and then spend the last two
> days trying to cram all this nonsense back into my head, I think I have
> a slightly simpler option.
> 
> In any case, I'll go respin the patch-set and repost.

That is; what is wrong with the below patch against mainline?

---

 kernel/futex.c | 48 +++++++++++++-----------------------------------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
index c591a2a..fafa25a 100644
--- a/kernel/futex.c
+++ b/kernel/futex.c
@@ -1318,12 +1318,18 @@ static int wake_futex_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 uval, 
struct futex_q *this,
        new_owner = rt_mutex_next_owner(&pi_state->pi_mutex);
 
        /*
-        * It is possible that the next waiter (the one that brought
-        * this owner to the kernel) timed out and is no longer
-        * waiting on the lock.
+        * When we interleave with futex_lock_pi() where it does
+        * rt_mutex_timed_futex_lock(), we might observe @this futex_q waiter,
+        * but the rt_mutex's wait_list can be empty (either still, or again,
+        * depending on which side we land).
+        *
+        * When this happens, give up our locks and try again, giving the
+        * futex_lock_pi() instance time to complete and unqueue_me().
         */
-       if (!new_owner)
-               new_owner = this->task;
+       if (!new_owner) {
+               raw_spin_unlock_irq(&pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
+               return -EAGAIN;
+       }
 
        /*
         * We pass it to the next owner. The WAITERS bit is always
@@ -2245,43 +2251,15 @@ static int fixup_owner(u32 __user *uaddr, struct 
futex_q *q, int locked)
        }
 
        /*
-        * Catch the rare case, where the lock was released when we were on the
-        * way back before we locked the hash bucket.
-        */
-       if (q->pi_state->owner == current) {
-               /*
-                * Try to get the rt_mutex now. This might fail as some other
-                * task acquired the rt_mutex after we removed ourself from the
-                * rt_mutex waiters list.
-                */
-               if (rt_mutex_trylock(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex)) {
-                       locked = 1;
-                       goto out;
-               }
-
-               /*
-                * pi_state is incorrect, some other task did a lock steal and
-                * we returned due to timeout or signal without taking the
-                * rt_mutex. Too late.
-                */
-               raw_spin_lock_irq(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
-               owner = rt_mutex_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex);
-               if (!owner)
-                       owner = rt_mutex_next_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex);
-               raw_spin_unlock_irq(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex.wait_lock);
-               ret = fixup_pi_state_owner(uaddr, q, owner);
-               goto out;
-       }
-
-       /*
         * Paranoia check. If we did not take the lock, then we should not be
         * the owner of the rt_mutex.
         */
-       if (rt_mutex_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex) == current)
+       if (rt_mutex_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex) == current) {
                printk(KERN_ERR "fixup_owner: ret = %d pi-mutex: %p "
                                "pi-state %p\n", ret,
                                q->pi_state->pi_mutex.owner,
                                q->pi_state->owner);
+       }
 
 out:
        return ret ? ret : locked;

Reply via email to