Re: [PATCH 3/4] locking/rwbase: Fix rwbase_write_lock() vs __rwbase_read_lock()
From: Thomas Gleixner
Date: Tue Sep 14 2021 - 03:46:06 EST
On Thu, Sep 09 2021 at 12:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Boqun noticed that the write-trylock sequence of load+set is broken in
> rwbase_write_lock()'s wait-loop since they're not both under the same
> wait_lock instance.
Confused.
lock(); A
for (; atomic_read(readers);) {
...
unlock();
..
lock(); B
}
atomic_set();
unlock(); A or B
The read/set is always in the same lock instance.
> Restructure the code to make this more obvious and correct.
I agree that it's easier to read, but I disagree that it makes the code
more correct.
Thanks,
tglx