File: /usr/src/linux/arch/s390/kernel/semaphore.c

1     /*
2      *  linux/arch/S390/kernel/semaphore.c
3      *
4      *  S390 version
5      *    Copyright (C) 1998-2000 IBM Corporation
6      *    Author(s): Martin Schwidefsky
7      *
8      *  Derived from "linux/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c
9      *    Copyright (C) 1999, Linus Torvalds
10      *
11      */
12     #include <linux/sched.h>
13     
14     #include <asm/semaphore.h>
15     
16     /*
17      * Semaphores are implemented using a two-way counter:
18      * The "count" variable is decremented for each process
19      * that tries to acquire the semaphore, while the "sleeping"
20      * variable is a count of such acquires.
21      *
22      * Notably, the inline "up()" and "down()" functions can
23      * efficiently test if they need to do any extra work (up
24      * needs to do something only if count was negative before
25      * the increment operation.
26      *
27      * "sleeping" and the contention routine ordering is
28      * protected by the semaphore spinlock.
29      *
30      * Note that these functions are only called when there is
31      * contention on the lock, and as such all this is the
32      * "non-critical" part of the whole semaphore business. The
33      * critical part is the inline stuff in <asm/semaphore.h>
34      * where we want to avoid any extra jumps and calls.
35      */
36     
37     /*
38      * Logic:
39      *  - only on a boundary condition do we need to care. When we go
40      *    from a negative count to a non-negative, we wake people up.
41      *  - when we go from a non-negative count to a negative do we
42      *    (a) synchronize with the "sleeper" count and (b) make sure
43      *    that we're on the wakeup list before we synchronize so that
44      *    we cannot lose wakeup events.
45      */
46     
47     void __up(struct semaphore *sem)
48     {
49     	wake_up(&sem->wait);
50     }
51     
52     static spinlock_t semaphore_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
53     
54     void __down(struct semaphore * sem)
55     {
56     	struct task_struct *tsk = current;
57     	DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
58     	tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
59     	add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
60     
61     	spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
62     	sem->sleepers++;
63     	for (;;) {
64     		int sleepers = sem->sleepers;
65     
66     		/*
67     		 * Add "everybody else" into it. They aren't
68     		 * playing, because we own the spinlock.
69     		 */
70     		if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers - 1, &sem->count)) {
71     			sem->sleepers = 0;
72     			break;
73     		}
74     		sem->sleepers = 1;	/* us - see -1 above */
75     		spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
76     
77     		schedule();
78     		tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
79     		spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
80     	}
81     	spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
82     	remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
83     	tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
84     	wake_up(&sem->wait);
85     }
86     
87     int __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
88     {
89     	int retval = 0;
90     	struct task_struct *tsk = current;
91     	DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
92     	tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
93     	add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
94     
95     	spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
96     	sem->sleepers ++;
97     	for (;;) {
98     		int sleepers = sem->sleepers;
99     
100     		/*
101     		 * With signals pending, this turns into
102     		 * the trylock failure case - we won't be
103     		 * sleeping, and we* can't get the lock as
104     		 * it has contention. Just correct the count
105     		 * and exit.
106     		 */
107     		if (signal_pending(current)) {
108     			retval = -EINTR;
109     			sem->sleepers = 0;
110     			atomic_add(sleepers, &sem->count);
111     			break;
112     		}
113     
114     		/*
115     		 * Add "everybody else" into it. They aren't
116     		 * playing, because we own the spinlock. The
117     		 * "-1" is because we're still hoping to get
118     		 * the lock.
119     		 */
120     		if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers - 1, &sem->count)) {
121     			sem->sleepers = 0;
122     			break;
123     		}
124     		sem->sleepers = 1;	/* us - see -1 above */
125     		spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
126     
127     		schedule();
128     		tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
129     		spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
130     	}
131     	spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
132     	tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
133     	remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
134     	wake_up(&sem->wait);
135     	return retval;
136     }
137     
138     /*
139      * Trylock failed - make sure we correct for
140      * having decremented the count.
141      */
142     int __down_trylock(struct semaphore * sem)
143     {
144             unsigned long flags;
145     	int sleepers;
146     
147     	spin_lock_irqsave(&semaphore_lock, flags);
148     	sleepers = sem->sleepers + 1;
149     	sem->sleepers = 0;
150     
151     	/*
152     	 * Add "everybody else" and us into it. They aren't
153     	 * playing, because we own the spinlock.
154     	 */
155     	if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers, &sem->count))
156     		wake_up(&sem->wait);
157     
158     	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&semaphore_lock, flags);
159     	return 1;
160     }
161