[tip:perf/core] perf: Do poll_wait() before checking condition in perf_poll()
Commit-ID: e708d7ad80737496870fd0b6794704d063fb0cdc
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/e708d7ad80737496870fd0b6794704d063fb0cdc
Author: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
AuthorDate: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 15:31:08 +0200
Committer: Ingo Molnar
CommitDate: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 07:51:11 +0200
perf: Do poll_wait() before checking condition in perf_poll()
One should first enqueue to the waitqueue and then check for the
condition. If the condition gets true after mutex_unlock() but before
poll_wait() then we lose it and would have wait for another wakeup.
This has been like this since v2.6.31-rc1 commit c7138f37f9 ("perf_counter:
fix perf_poll()"). Before that it was slightly worse. I guess we get enough
wakeups so if we miss here one it doesn't really matter. It is still a
bad example.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra
Link:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1407159068-1478-1-git-send-email-bige...@linutronix.de
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Cc: Linus Torvalds
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
---
kernel/events/core.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index a254605..2d7363a 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -3629,6 +3629,7 @@ static unsigned int perf_poll(struct file *file,
poll_table *wait)
struct ring_buffer *rb;
unsigned int events = POLL_HUP;
+ poll_wait(file, >waitq, wait);
/*
* Pin the event->rb by taking event->mmap_mutex; otherwise
* perf_event_set_output() can swizzle our rb and make us miss wakeups.
@@ -3638,9 +3639,6 @@ static unsigned int perf_poll(struct file *file,
poll_table *wait)
if (rb)
events = atomic_xchg(>poll, 0);
mutex_unlock(>mmap_mutex);
-
- poll_wait(file, >waitq, wait);
-
return events;
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[tip:perf/core] perf: Do poll_wait() before checking condition in perf_poll()
Commit-ID: e708d7ad80737496870fd0b6794704d063fb0cdc Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/e708d7ad80737496870fd0b6794704d063fb0cdc Author: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior bige...@linutronix.de AuthorDate: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 15:31:08 +0200 Committer: Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org CommitDate: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 07:51:11 +0200 perf: Do poll_wait() before checking condition in perf_poll() One should first enqueue to the waitqueue and then check for the condition. If the condition gets true after mutex_unlock() but before poll_wait() then we lose it and would have wait for another wakeup. This has been like this since v2.6.31-rc1 commit c7138f37f9 (perf_counter: fix perf_poll()). Before that it was slightly worse. I guess we get enough wakeups so if we miss here one it doesn't really matter. It is still a bad example. Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior bige...@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1407159068-1478-1-git-send-email-bige...@linutronix.de Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a...@kernel.org Cc: Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org --- kernel/events/core.c | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c index a254605..2d7363a 100644 --- a/kernel/events/core.c +++ b/kernel/events/core.c @@ -3629,6 +3629,7 @@ static unsigned int perf_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait) struct ring_buffer *rb; unsigned int events = POLL_HUP; + poll_wait(file, event-waitq, wait); /* * Pin the event-rb by taking event-mmap_mutex; otherwise * perf_event_set_output() can swizzle our rb and make us miss wakeups. @@ -3638,9 +3639,6 @@ static unsigned int perf_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait) if (rb) events = atomic_xchg(rb-poll, 0); mutex_unlock(event-mmap_mutex); - - poll_wait(file, event-waitq, wait); - return events; } -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
