ipc: Replace spin_unlock_wait() with lock/unlock pair
authorPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Thu, 29 Jun 2017 19:59:32 +0000 (12:59 -0700)
committerPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:08:57 +0000 (08:08 -0700)
commite0892e086aae8d86e33dc8fb87f3d36c901df574
tree6a480513ccaa1bb3e2427bddf8f452994bc3d901
parent8083f29349372d5b949dc022ae9a981edc89ac41
ipc: Replace spin_unlock_wait() with lock/unlock pair

There is no agreed-upon definition of spin_unlock_wait()'s semantics,
and it appears that all callers could do just as well with a lock/unlock
pair.  This commit therefore replaces the spin_unlock_wait() call in
exit_sem() with spin_lock() followed immediately by spin_unlock().
This should be safe from a performance perspective because exit_sem()
is rarely invoked in production.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Acked-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
ipc/sem.c