[PATCH] unify x86/x86-64 semaphore code
authorBenjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
Sat, 3 Sep 2005 22:56:52 +0000 (15:56 -0700)
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@evo.osdl.org>
Mon, 5 Sep 2005 07:06:14 +0000 (00:06 -0700)
This patch moves the common code in x86 and x86-64's semaphore.c into a
single file in lib/semaphore-sleepers.c.  The arch specific asm stubs are
left in the arch tree (in semaphore.c for i386 and in the asm for x86-64).
There should be no changes in code/functionality with this patch.

Signed-off-by: Benjamin LaHaise <benjamin.c.lahaise@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
arch/i386/Kconfig
arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c
arch/um/Kconfig_i386
arch/um/Kconfig_x86_64
arch/um/sys-x86_64/Makefile
arch/x86_64/Kconfig
arch/x86_64/kernel/Makefile
arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c [deleted file]
lib/Makefile
lib/semaphore-sleepers.c [new file with mode: 0644]

index dcb0ad098c601d00b339fe4685d7452de96c25ef..3b3b017e1c154fa9419dfec55b969cb48e91b608 100644 (file)
@@ -14,6 +14,10 @@ config X86
          486, 586, Pentiums, and various instruction-set-compatible chips by
          AMD, Cyrix, and others.
 
+config SEMAPHORE_SLEEPERS
+       bool
+       default y
+
 config MMU
        bool
        default y
index 469f496e55c0f56787929fa1c387572097c9ddc8..7455ab6439438bca2722b0df63f823a93ccc032f 100644 (file)
  * 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
index 27c18a8d9d17d72c22d6f1c08ec6001d8bbc9563..8ad156a00499acf682a808e37d5120337f15c5b2 100644 (file)
@@ -6,6 +6,10 @@ config 64BIT
        bool
        default n
 
+config SEMAPHORE_SLEEPERS
+       bool
+       default y
+
 config TOP_ADDR
        hex
        default 0xc0000000 if !HOST_2G_2G
index 735a047c890cadeb1784246ab92dca64cc5aa441..6e5357c5bcfb690cad5caa50e0abf3a0a331ed30 100644 (file)
@@ -6,6 +6,10 @@ config 64BIT
        bool
        default y
 
+config SEMAPHORE_SLEEPERS
+       bool
+       default y
+
 config TOP_ADDR
        hex
        default 0x80000000
index 7488206ce6f4ae91ba20123a9efcede188b10996..736d3edec581ded9e06e8b40ac6a24793d7a2e76 100644 (file)
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 
 #XXX: why into lib-y?
 lib-y = bitops.o bugs.o csum-partial.o delay.o fault.o mem.o memcpy.o \
-       ptrace.o ptrace_user.o semaphore.o sigcontext.o signal.o stub.o \
+       ptrace.o ptrace_user.o sigcontext.o signal.o stub.o \
        stub_segv.o syscalls.o syscall_table.o sysrq.o thunk.o
 
 obj-y := ksyms.o
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MODULES) += module.o um_module.o
 USER_OBJS := ptrace_user.o sigcontext.o
 
 SYMLINKS = bitops.c csum-copy.S csum-partial.c csum-wrappers.c memcpy.S \
-       semaphore.c thunk.S module.c
+       thunk.S module.c
 
 include arch/um/scripts/Makefile.rules
 
@@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ csum-copy.S-dir = lib
 csum-partial.c-dir = lib
 csum-wrappers.c-dir = lib
 memcpy.S-dir = lib
-semaphore.c-dir = kernel
 thunk.S-dir = lib
 module.c-dir = kernel
 
index 660a03a89e6663bf7f04bd83c163c441210e8dc1..75e52c57f19c0442e2288e7eefef45355b835e71 100644 (file)
@@ -24,6 +24,10 @@ config X86
        bool
        default y
 
+config SEMAPHORE_SLEEPERS
+       bool
+       default y
+
 config MMU
        bool
        default y
index 48f9e2c19cd6f78a4cdc21efdec7afec0da19277..427501a336c44d5786c44ecd685695ed596266b2 100644 (file)
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 
 extra-y        := head.o head64.o init_task.o vmlinux.lds
 EXTRA_AFLAGS   := -traditional
-obj-y  := process.o semaphore.o signal.o entry.o traps.o irq.o \
+obj-y  := process.o signal.o entry.o traps.o irq.o \
                ptrace.o time.o ioport.o ldt.o setup.o i8259.o sys_x86_64.o \
                x8664_ksyms.o i387.o syscall.o vsyscall.o \
                setup64.o bootflag.o e820.o reboot.o quirks.o
diff --git a/arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c b/arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c
deleted file mode 100644 (file)
index 48f7c18..0000000
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,180 +0,0 @@
-/*
- * x86_64 semaphore implementation.
- *
- * (C) Copyright 1999 Linus Torvalds
- *
- * Portions Copyright 1999 Red Hat, Inc.
- *
- *     This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
- *     modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
- *     as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version
- *     2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
- *
- * rw semaphores implemented November 1999 by Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
- */
-#include <linux/config.h>
-#include <linux/sched.h>
-#include <linux/init.h>
-#include <asm/errno.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.
- */
-
-void __up(struct semaphore *sem)
-{
-       wake_up(&sem->wait);
-}
-
-void __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;
-}
-
-int __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.
- */
-int __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;
-}
-
-
index 52f83380f70426600d7f031c54e316cb04151c0a..3e2bd0df23bb4c76d745bdee5b71b97a57dd4c8f 100644 (file)
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ endif
 
 lib-$(CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK) += rwsem-spinlock.o
 lib-$(CONFIG_RWSEM_XCHGADD_ALGORITHM) += rwsem.o
+lib-$(CONFIG_SEMAPHORE_SLEEPERS) += semaphore-sleepers.o
 lib-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_FIND_NEXT_BIT) += find_next_bit.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_LOCK_KERNEL) += kernel_lock.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT) += smp_processor_id.o
diff --git a/lib/semaphore-sleepers.c b/lib/semaphore-sleepers.c
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..4d5f188
--- /dev/null
@@ -0,0 +1,177 @@
+/*
+ * i386 and x86-64 semaphore implementation.
+ *
+ * (C) Copyright 1999 Linus Torvalds
+ *
+ * Portions Copyright 1999 Red Hat, Inc.
+ *
+ *     This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
+ *     modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
+ *     as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version
+ *     2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
+ *
+ * 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.
+ */
+
+fastcall void __up(struct semaphore *sem)
+{
+       wake_up(&sem->wait);
+}
+
+fastcall void __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;
+}
+
+fastcall int __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.
+ */
+fastcall int __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;
+}