| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | /* | 
|  | 2 | * arch/v850/kernel/semaphore.c -- Semaphore support | 
|  | 3 | * | 
|  | 4 | *  Copyright (C) 1998-2000  IBM Corporation | 
|  | 5 | *  Copyright (C) 1999  Linus Torvalds | 
|  | 6 | * | 
|  | 7 | * This file is subject to the terms and conditions of the GNU General | 
|  | 8 | * Public License.  See the file COPYING in the main directory of this | 
|  | 9 | * archive for more details. | 
|  | 10 | * | 
|  | 11 | * This file is a copy of the s390 version, arch/s390/kernel/semaphore.c | 
|  | 12 | *    Author(s): Martin Schwidefsky | 
|  | 13 | * which was derived from the i386 version, linux/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c | 
|  | 14 | */ | 
|  | 15 |  | 
|  | 16 | #include <linux/errno.h> | 
|  | 17 | #include <linux/sched.h> | 
|  | 18 | #include <linux/init.h> | 
|  | 19 |  | 
|  | 20 | #include <asm/semaphore.h> | 
|  | 21 |  | 
|  | 22 | /* | 
|  | 23 | * Semaphores are implemented using a two-way counter: | 
|  | 24 | * The "count" variable is decremented for each process | 
|  | 25 | * that tries to acquire the semaphore, while the "sleeping" | 
|  | 26 | * variable is a count of such acquires. | 
|  | 27 | * | 
|  | 28 | * Notably, the inline "up()" and "down()" functions can | 
|  | 29 | * efficiently test if they need to do any extra work (up | 
|  | 30 | * needs to do something only if count was negative before | 
|  | 31 | * the increment operation. | 
|  | 32 | * | 
|  | 33 | * "sleeping" and the contention routine ordering is | 
|  | 34 | * protected by the semaphore spinlock. | 
|  | 35 | * | 
|  | 36 | * Note that these functions are only called when there is | 
|  | 37 | * contention on the lock, and as such all this is the | 
|  | 38 | * "non-critical" part of the whole semaphore business. The | 
|  | 39 | * critical part is the inline stuff in <asm/semaphore.h> | 
|  | 40 | * where we want to avoid any extra jumps and calls. | 
|  | 41 | */ | 
|  | 42 |  | 
|  | 43 | /* | 
|  | 44 | * Logic: | 
|  | 45 | *  - only on a boundary condition do we need to care. When we go | 
|  | 46 | *    from a negative count to a non-negative, we wake people up. | 
|  | 47 | *  - when we go from a non-negative count to a negative do we | 
|  | 48 | *    (a) synchronize with the "sleeper" count and (b) make sure | 
|  | 49 | *    that we're on the wakeup list before we synchronize so that | 
|  | 50 | *    we cannot lose wakeup events. | 
|  | 51 | */ | 
|  | 52 |  | 
|  | 53 | void __up(struct semaphore *sem) | 
|  | 54 | { | 
|  | 55 | wake_up(&sem->wait); | 
|  | 56 | } | 
|  | 57 |  | 
|  | 58 | static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 59 |  | 
|  | 60 | void __sched __down(struct semaphore * sem) | 
|  | 61 | { | 
|  | 62 | struct task_struct *tsk = current; | 
|  | 63 | DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk); | 
|  | 64 | tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE; | 
|  | 65 | add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait); | 
|  | 66 |  | 
|  | 67 | spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 68 | sem->sleepers++; | 
|  | 69 | for (;;) { | 
|  | 70 | int sleepers = sem->sleepers; | 
|  | 71 |  | 
|  | 72 | /* | 
|  | 73 | * Add "everybody else" into it. They aren't | 
|  | 74 | * playing, because we own the spinlock. | 
|  | 75 | */ | 
|  | 76 | if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers - 1, &sem->count)) { | 
|  | 77 | sem->sleepers = 0; | 
|  | 78 | break; | 
|  | 79 | } | 
|  | 80 | sem->sleepers = 1;	/* us - see -1 above */ | 
|  | 81 | spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 82 |  | 
|  | 83 | schedule(); | 
|  | 84 | tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE; | 
|  | 85 | spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 86 | } | 
|  | 87 | spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 88 | remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); | 
|  | 89 | tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; | 
|  | 90 | wake_up(&sem->wait); | 
|  | 91 | } | 
|  | 92 |  | 
|  | 93 | int __sched __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem) | 
|  | 94 | { | 
|  | 95 | int retval = 0; | 
|  | 96 | struct task_struct *tsk = current; | 
|  | 97 | DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk); | 
|  | 98 | tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; | 
|  | 99 | add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait); | 
|  | 100 |  | 
|  | 101 | spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 102 | sem->sleepers ++; | 
|  | 103 | for (;;) { | 
|  | 104 | int sleepers = sem->sleepers; | 
|  | 105 |  | 
|  | 106 | /* | 
|  | 107 | * With signals pending, this turns into | 
|  | 108 | * the trylock failure case - we won't be | 
|  | 109 | * sleeping, and we* can't get the lock as | 
|  | 110 | * it has contention. Just correct the count | 
|  | 111 | * and exit. | 
|  | 112 | */ | 
|  | 113 | if (signal_pending(current)) { | 
|  | 114 | retval = -EINTR; | 
|  | 115 | sem->sleepers = 0; | 
|  | 116 | atomic_add(sleepers, &sem->count); | 
|  | 117 | break; | 
|  | 118 | } | 
|  | 119 |  | 
|  | 120 | /* | 
|  | 121 | * Add "everybody else" into it. They aren't | 
|  | 122 | * playing, because we own the spinlock. The | 
|  | 123 | * "-1" is because we're still hoping to get | 
|  | 124 | * the lock. | 
|  | 125 | */ | 
|  | 126 | if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers - 1, &sem->count)) { | 
|  | 127 | sem->sleepers = 0; | 
|  | 128 | break; | 
|  | 129 | } | 
|  | 130 | sem->sleepers = 1;	/* us - see -1 above */ | 
|  | 131 | spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 132 |  | 
|  | 133 | schedule(); | 
|  | 134 | tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE; | 
|  | 135 | spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 136 | } | 
|  | 137 | spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock); | 
|  | 138 | tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; | 
|  | 139 | remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); | 
|  | 140 | wake_up(&sem->wait); | 
|  | 141 | return retval; | 
|  | 142 | } | 
|  | 143 |  | 
|  | 144 | /* | 
|  | 145 | * Trylock failed - make sure we correct for | 
|  | 146 | * having decremented the count. | 
|  | 147 | */ | 
|  | 148 | int __down_trylock(struct semaphore * sem) | 
|  | 149 | { | 
|  | 150 | unsigned long flags; | 
|  | 151 | int sleepers; | 
|  | 152 |  | 
|  | 153 | spin_lock_irqsave(&semaphore_lock, flags); | 
|  | 154 | sleepers = sem->sleepers + 1; | 
|  | 155 | sem->sleepers = 0; | 
|  | 156 |  | 
|  | 157 | /* | 
|  | 158 | * Add "everybody else" and us into it. They aren't | 
|  | 159 | * playing, because we own the spinlock. | 
|  | 160 | */ | 
|  | 161 | if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers, &sem->count)) | 
|  | 162 | wake_up(&sem->wait); | 
|  | 163 |  | 
|  | 164 | spin_unlock_irqrestore(&semaphore_lock, flags); | 
|  | 165 | return 1; | 
|  | 166 | } |