On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Will Deacon wrote:
> Sebastian: could you try the diff below, please? If that fixes s390, then
> we can debate the merits of GENERIC_LOCKBREAK independently of fixing this
> issue.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Will
>
> --->8
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/spinlock.c b/kernel/locking/spinlock.c
> index 1fd1a7543cdd..0ebb253e2199 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/spinlock.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/spinlock.c
> @@ -68,8 +68,8 @@ void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock(locktype##_t *lock) \
> \
> if (!(lock)->break_lock) \
> (lock)->break_lock = 1; \
> - while ((lock)->break_lock) \
> - arch_##op##_relax(&lock->raw_lock); \
> + \
> + arch_##op##_relax(&lock->raw_lock); \
> } \
> (lock)->break_lock = 0; \
> } \
> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ unsigned long __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irqsave(locktype##_t *lock) \
> \
> if (!(lock)->break_lock) \
> (lock)->break_lock = 1; \
> - while ((lock)->break_lock) \
> - arch_##op##_relax(&lock->raw_lock); \
> + \
> + arch_##op##_relax(&lock->raw_lock); \
> } \
> (lock)->break_lock = 0; \
> return flags; \
I tested that on top of 4.15.0-rc1 and it worked!
Sebastian
From 1585224432702626977@xxx Mon Nov 27 13:03:47 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1584789385193417838
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread