From f31e11d87a5d7601636710195891ba462ad99f11 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Oleg Nesterov Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:54:44 -0700 Subject: wait_task_inactive(): don't consider task->nivcsw If wait_task_inactive() returns success the task was deactivated. In that case schedule() always increments ->nvcsw which alone can be used as a "generation counter". If the next call returns the same number, we can be sure that the task was unscheduled. Otherwise, because we know that .on_rq == 0 again, ->nvcsw should have been changed in between. Q: perhaps it is better to do "ncsw = (p->nvcsw << 1) | 1" ? This decreases the possibility of "was it unscheduled" false positive when ->nvcsw == 0. Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/sched.c | 7 ++----- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) (limited to 'kernel/sched.c') diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c index da7c5d23cc0..908670aa215 100644 --- a/kernel/sched.c +++ b/kernel/sched.c @@ -1921,11 +1921,8 @@ unsigned long wait_task_inactive(struct task_struct *p, long match_state) running = task_running(rq, p); on_rq = p->se.on_rq; ncsw = 0; - if (!match_state || p->state == match_state) { - ncsw = p->nivcsw + p->nvcsw; - if (unlikely(!ncsw)) - ncsw = 1; - } + if (!match_state || p->state == match_state) + ncsw = p->nvcsw ?: 1; task_rq_unlock(rq, &flags); /* -- cgit v1.2.3