* 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.
- */
-
-static fastcall void __attribute_used__ __up(struct semaphore *sem)
-{
- wake_up(&sem->wait);
-}
-
-static fastcall void __attribute_used__ __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;
-}
-
-static fastcall int __attribute_used__ __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.
- */
-static fastcall int __attribute_used__ __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;
-}
-
-
/*
* The semaphore operations have a special calling sequence that
* allow us to do a simpler in-line version of them. These routines
/*
- * x86_64 semaphore implementation.
+ * i386 and x86-64 semaphore implementation.
*
* (C) Copyright 1999 Linus Torvalds
*
*/
#include <linux/config.h>
#include <linux/sched.h>
+#include <linux/err.h>
#include <linux/init.h>
-#include <asm/errno.h>
-
#include <asm/semaphore.h>
/*
* we cannot lose wakeup events.
*/
-void __up(struct semaphore *sem)
+fastcall void __up(struct semaphore *sem)
{
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
-void __sched __down(struct semaphore * sem)
+fastcall void __sched __down(struct semaphore * sem)
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
}
-int __sched __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
+fastcall int __sched __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
{
int retval = 0;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
* single "cmpxchg" without failure cases,
* but then it wouldn't work on a 386.
*/
-int __down_trylock(struct semaphore * sem)
+fastcall int __down_trylock(struct semaphore * sem)
{
int sleepers;
unsigned long flags;
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
return 1;
}
-
-
projects / linux-2.6 / commitdiff