diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'lib/semaphore-sleepers.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | lib/semaphore-sleepers.c | 177 |
1 files changed, 177 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/lib/semaphore-sleepers.c b/lib/semaphore-sleepers.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..4d5f18889fa --- /dev/null +++ b/lib/semaphore-sleepers.c @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +/* + * i386 and x86-64 semaphore implementation. + * + * (C) Copyright 1999 Linus Torvalds + * + * Portions Copyright 1999 Red Hat, Inc. + * + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or + * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License + * as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version + * 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. + * + * rw semaphores implemented November 1999 by Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org> + */ +#include <linux/config.h> +#include <linux/sched.h> +#include <linux/err.h> +#include <linux/init.h> +#include <asm/semaphore.h> + +/* + * Semaphores are implemented using a two-way counter: + * The "count" variable is decremented for each process + * that tries to acquire the semaphore, while the "sleeping" + * variable is a count of such acquires. + * + * Notably, the inline "up()" and "down()" functions can + * efficiently test if they need to do any extra work (up + * needs to do something only if count was negative before + * the increment operation. + * + * "sleeping" and the contention routine ordering is protected + * by the spinlock in the semaphore's waitqueue head. + * + * Note that these functions are only called when there is + * contention on the lock, and as such all this is the + * "non-critical" part of the whole semaphore business. The + * critical part is the inline stuff in <asm/semaphore.h> + * where we want to avoid any extra jumps and calls. + */ + +/* + * Logic: + * - only on a boundary condition do we need to care. When we go + * from a negative count to a non-negative, we wake people up. + * - when we go from a non-negative count to a negative do we + * (a) synchronize with the "sleeper" count and (b) make sure + * that we're on the wakeup list before we synchronize so that + * we cannot lose wakeup events. + */ + +fastcall void __up(struct semaphore *sem) +{ + wake_up(&sem->wait); +} + +fastcall void __sched __down(struct semaphore * sem) +{ + struct task_struct *tsk = current; + DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk); + unsigned long flags; + + tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE; + spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait); + + sem->sleepers++; + for (;;) { + int sleepers = sem->sleepers; + + /* + * Add "everybody else" into it. They aren't + * playing, because we own the spinlock in + * the wait_queue_head. + */ + if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers - 1, &sem->count)) { + sem->sleepers = 0; + break; + } + sem->sleepers = 1; /* us - see -1 above */ + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + + schedule(); + + spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE; + } + remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait); + wake_up_locked(&sem->wait); + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; +} + +fastcall int __sched __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem) +{ + int retval = 0; + struct task_struct *tsk = current; + DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk); + unsigned long flags; + + tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; + spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait); + + sem->sleepers++; + for (;;) { + int sleepers = sem->sleepers; + + /* + * With signals pending, this turns into + * the trylock failure case - we won't be + * sleeping, and we* can't get the lock as + * it has contention. Just correct the count + * and exit. + */ + if (signal_pending(current)) { + retval = -EINTR; + sem->sleepers = 0; + atomic_add(sleepers, &sem->count); + break; + } + + /* + * Add "everybody else" into it. They aren't + * playing, because we own the spinlock in + * wait_queue_head. The "-1" is because we're + * still hoping to get the semaphore. + */ + if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers - 1, &sem->count)) { + sem->sleepers = 0; + break; + } + sem->sleepers = 1; /* us - see -1 above */ + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + + schedule(); + + spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; + } + remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait); + wake_up_locked(&sem->wait); + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + + tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; + return retval; +} + +/* + * Trylock failed - make sure we correct for + * having decremented the count. + * + * We could have done the trylock with a + * single "cmpxchg" without failure cases, + * but then it wouldn't work on a 386. + */ +fastcall int __down_trylock(struct semaphore * sem) +{ + int sleepers; + unsigned long flags; + + spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + sleepers = sem->sleepers + 1; + sem->sleepers = 0; + + /* + * Add "everybody else" and us into it. They aren't + * playing, because we own the spinlock in the + * wait_queue_head. + */ + if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers, &sem->count)) { + wake_up_locked(&sem->wait); + } + + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags); + return 1; +} |