From 1be5d4fa0af34fb7bafa205aeb59f5c7cc7a089d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Gleixner Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 21:04:42 +0000 Subject: locking/rtmutex: Use READ_ONCE() in rt_mutex_owner() While debugging the rtmutex unlock vs. dequeue race Will suggested to use READ_ONCE() in rt_mutex_owner() as it might race against the cmpxchg_release() in unlock_rt_mutex_safe(). Will: "It's a minor thing which will most likely not matter in practice" Careful search did not unearth an actual problem in todays code, but it's better to be safe than surprised. Suggested-by: Will Deacon Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Cc: David Daney Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Mark Rutland Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Sebastian Siewior Cc: Steven Rostedt Cc: Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161130210030.431379999@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h') diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h index 4f5f83c..e317e1c 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h +++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex_common.h @@ -75,8 +75,9 @@ task_top_pi_waiter(struct task_struct *p) static inline struct task_struct *rt_mutex_owner(struct rt_mutex *lock) { - return (struct task_struct *) - ((unsigned long)lock->owner & ~RT_MUTEX_OWNER_MASKALL); + unsigned long owner = (unsigned long) READ_ONCE(lock->owner); + + return (struct task_struct *) (owner & ~RT_MUTEX_OWNER_MASKALL); } /* -- cgit v1.1