mirror of
https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git
synced 2024-11-10 14:11:52 +00:00
task_work_run: don't take ->pi_lock unconditionally
As Peter pointed out, task_work() can avoid ->pi_lock and cmpxchg() if task->task_works == NULL && !PF_EXITING. And in fact the only reason why task_work_run() needs ->pi_lock is the possible race with task_work_cancel(), we can optimize this code and make the locking more clear. Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
This commit is contained in:
parent
3684f24653
commit
6fb614920b
@ -97,16 +97,26 @@ void task_work_run(void)
|
||||
* work->func() can do task_work_add(), do not set
|
||||
* work_exited unless the list is empty.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
raw_spin_lock_irq(&task->pi_lock);
|
||||
do {
|
||||
head = NULL;
|
||||
work = READ_ONCE(task->task_works);
|
||||
head = !work && (task->flags & PF_EXITING) ?
|
||||
&work_exited : NULL;
|
||||
if (!work) {
|
||||
if (task->flags & PF_EXITING)
|
||||
head = &work_exited;
|
||||
else
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
} while (cmpxchg(&task->task_works, work, head) != work);
|
||||
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&task->pi_lock);
|
||||
|
||||
if (!work)
|
||||
break;
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Synchronize with task_work_cancel(). It can not remove
|
||||
* the first entry == work, cmpxchg(task_works) must fail.
|
||||
* But it can remove another entry from the ->next list.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
raw_spin_lock_irq(&task->pi_lock);
|
||||
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&task->pi_lock);
|
||||
|
||||
do {
|
||||
next = work->next;
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user