On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 12:29:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 07:09:53PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 11:50:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > > wait_for_completion(&C); >> > > atomic_inc_return(); >> > > >> > > mutex_lock(A1); >> > > mutex_unlock(A1); >> > > >> > > >> > > <IRQ> >> > > spin_lock(B1); >> > > spin_unlock(B1); >> > > >> > > ... >> > > >> > > spin_lock(B64); >> > > spin_unlock(B64); >> > > </IRQ> >> > > >> > > > > Also consider the alternative: > > <IRQ> > spin_lock(D); > spin_unlock(D); > > complete(&C); > </IRQ> > > in which case the context test will also not work. Context tests are done on xhlock with the release context, _not_ acquisition context. For example, spin_lock(D) and complete(&C) are in the same context, so the test would pass in this example. So it works. -- Thanks, Byungchul -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
