On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Will Deacon wrote: > Sebastian: could you try the diff below, please? If that fixes s390, then > we can debate the merits of GENERIC_LOCKBREAK independently of fixing this > issue. > > Thanks, > > Will > > --->8 > > diff --git a/kernel/locking/spinlock.c b/kernel/locking/spinlock.c > index 1fd1a7543cdd..0ebb253e2199 100644 > --- a/kernel/locking/spinlock.c > +++ b/kernel/locking/spinlock.c > @@ -68,8 +68,8 @@ void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock(locktype##_t *lock) > \ > \ > if (!(lock)->break_lock) \ > (lock)->break_lock = 1; \ > - while ((lock)->break_lock) \ > - arch_##op##_relax(&lock->raw_lock); \ > + \ > + arch_##op##_relax(&lock->raw_lock); \ > } \ > (lock)->break_lock = 0; \ > } \ > @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ unsigned long __lockfunc > __raw_##op##_lock_irqsave(locktype##_t *lock) \ > \ > if (!(lock)->break_lock) \ > (lock)->break_lock = 1; \ > - while ((lock)->break_lock) \ > - arch_##op##_relax(&lock->raw_lock); \ > + \ > + arch_##op##_relax(&lock->raw_lock); \ > } \ > (lock)->break_lock = 0; \ > return flags; \
I tested that on top of 4.15.0-rc1 and it worked! Sebastian
