Re: [PATCH] x86/spinlocks: Fix regression in spinlock contention detection

[Raghavendra K T]

On 05/05/2015 09:45 AM, Tahsin Erdogan wrote:
> A spinlock is regarded as contended when there is at least one waiter.
> Currently, the code that checks whether there are any waiters rely on
> tail value being greater than head. However, this is not true if tail
> reaches the max value and wraps back to zero, so arch_spin_is_contended()
> incorrectly returns 0 (not contended) when tail is smaller than head.
>
> The original code (before regression) handled this case by casting the
> (tail - head) to an unsigned value. This change simply restores that
> behavior.
>
> Fixes: d6abfdb20223 ("x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on
> unlock")
> Signed-off-by: Tahsin Erdogan <tahsin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---

Tahsin,
Perhaps we need to CC stable (3.19) too..?


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/