On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:08:47AM +0800, Zenghui Yu wrote:
If the queue head is the only one in the queue and nobody is concurrentlyI think this is an important typo fix as you're right that we don't
setting PENDING bit, the uncontended transition should be n,0,0 -> 0,0,1.
Fix the typo.
Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
index cbff6ba53d56..591835415698 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
@@ -355,7 +355,7 @@ void queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
* If we observe contention, there is a concurrent locker.
*
* Undo and queue; our setting of PENDING might have made the
- * n,0,0 -> 0,0,0 transition fail and it will now be waiting
+ * n,0,0 -> 0,0,1 transition fail and it will now be waiting
* on @next to become !NULL.
*/
transition directly from having a waitqueue installed in the tail straight
to an unlocked state.
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
Then again, I acked the patch introducing this comment so what do I know?