Donate to e Foundation | Murena handsets with /e/OS | Own a part of Murena! Learn more

Commit 8cd641e3 authored by Davidlohr Bueso's avatar Davidlohr Bueso Committed by Paolo Bonzini
Browse files

sched/wait: Add swq_has_sleeper()



Which is the equivalent of what we have in regular waitqueues.
I'm not crazy about the name, but this also helps us get both
apis closer -- which iirc comes originally from the -net folks.

We also duplicate the comments for the lockless swait_active(),
from wait.h. Future users will make use of this interface.

Signed-off-by: default avatarDavidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPaolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
parent 3a8b0677
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
+56 −2
Original line number Original line Diff line number Diff line
@@ -79,9 +79,63 @@ extern void __init_swait_queue_head(struct swait_queue_head *q, const char *name
	DECLARE_SWAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(name)
	DECLARE_SWAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(name)
#endif
#endif


static inline int swait_active(struct swait_queue_head *q)
/**
 * swait_active -- locklessly test for waiters on the queue
 * @wq: the waitqueue to test for waiters
 *
 * returns true if the wait list is not empty
 *
 * NOTE: this function is lockless and requires care, incorrect usage _will_
 * lead to sporadic and non-obvious failure.
 *
 * NOTE2: this function has the same above implications as regular waitqueues.
 *
 * Use either while holding swait_queue_head::lock or when used for wakeups
 * with an extra smp_mb() like:
 *
 *      CPU0 - waker                    CPU1 - waiter
 *
 *                                      for (;;) {
 *      @cond = true;                     prepare_to_swait(&wq_head, &wait, state);
 *      smp_mb();                         // smp_mb() from set_current_state()
 *      if (swait_active(wq_head))        if (@cond)
 *        wake_up(wq_head);                      break;
 *                                        schedule();
 *                                      }
 *                                      finish_swait(&wq_head, &wait);
 *
 * Because without the explicit smp_mb() it's possible for the
 * swait_active() load to get hoisted over the @cond store such that we'll
 * observe an empty wait list while the waiter might not observe @cond.
 * This, in turn, can trigger missing wakeups.
 *
 * Also note that this 'optimization' trades a spin_lock() for an smp_mb(),
 * which (when the lock is uncontended) are of roughly equal cost.
 */
static inline int swait_active(struct swait_queue_head *wq)
{
{
	return !list_empty(&q->task_list);
	return !list_empty(&wq->task_list);
}

/**
 * swq_has_sleeper - check if there are any waiting processes
 * @wq: the waitqueue to test for waiters
 *
 * Returns true if @wq has waiting processes
 *
 * Please refer to the comment for swait_active.
 */
static inline bool swq_has_sleeper(struct swait_queue_head *wq)
{
	/*
	 * We need to be sure we are in sync with the list_add()
	 * modifications to the wait queue (task_list).
	 *
	 * This memory barrier should be paired with one on the
	 * waiting side.
	 */
	smp_mb();
	return swait_active(wq);
}
}


extern void swake_up(struct swait_queue_head *q);
extern void swake_up(struct swait_queue_head *q);