417dcdf99e
_atomic_dec_and_lock() should not unconditionally take the lock before calling atomic_dec_and_test() in the UP case. For consistency reasons it should behave exactly like in the SMP case. Besides that this works around the problem that with CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK this spins in __spin_lock_debug() if the lock is already taken even if the counter doesn't drop to 0. Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@suse.de> Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Acked-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Cc: Valerie Aurora <vaurora@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
34 lines
782 B
C
34 lines
782 B
C
#include <linux/module.h>
|
|
#include <linux/spinlock.h>
|
|
#include <asm/atomic.h>
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
* This is an implementation of the notion of "decrement a
|
|
* reference count, and return locked if it decremented to zero".
|
|
*
|
|
* NOTE NOTE NOTE! This is _not_ equivalent to
|
|
*
|
|
* if (atomic_dec_and_test(&atomic)) {
|
|
* spin_lock(&lock);
|
|
* return 1;
|
|
* }
|
|
* return 0;
|
|
*
|
|
* because the spin-lock and the decrement must be
|
|
* "atomic".
|
|
*/
|
|
int _atomic_dec_and_lock(atomic_t *atomic, spinlock_t *lock)
|
|
{
|
|
/* Subtract 1 from counter unless that drops it to 0 (ie. it was 1) */
|
|
if (atomic_add_unless(atomic, -1, 1))
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
/* Otherwise do it the slow way */
|
|
spin_lock(lock);
|
|
if (atomic_dec_and_test(atomic))
|
|
return 1;
|
|
spin_unlock(lock);
|
|
return 0;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
EXPORT_SYMBOL(_atomic_dec_and_lock);
|