Message-ID: <474D7F5B.9090008@lwfinger.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:46:51 -0600
From: Larry Finger <larry.finger@lwfinger.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Matthias Kaehlcke <matthias.kaehlcke@gmail.com>,
       Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question regarding mutex locking
References: <474CF06C.8020208@lwfinger.net> <20071128081031.GF20238@traven>
In-Reply-To: <20071128081031.GF20238@traven>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 846
Lines: 24

Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> El Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 10:37:00PM -0600 Larry Finger ha dit:
> 
>> If a particular routine needs to lock a mutex, but it may be entered with that mutex already locked,
>> would the following code be SMP safe?
>>
>> hold_lock = mutex_trylock()
>>
>> ...
>>
>> if (hold_lock)
>> 	mutex_unlock()
> 
> this is wont work, a mutex must not be released from another
> context than the one that acquired it.

I thought that mutex_trylock() returned 1 if it got the lock and 0 if not. If that is true, wouldn't
the if statement only unlock if the lock was obtained in this routine?

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/