From d0b2f91bede3bd5e3d24dd6803e56eee959c1797 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: André Fabian Silva Delgado Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 00:10:27 -0300 Subject: Linux-libre 4.8.2-gnu --- ipc/sem.c | 13 +------------ 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-) (limited to 'ipc/sem.c') diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c index 5d2f875e8..7c9d4f768 100644 --- a/ipc/sem.c +++ b/ipc/sem.c @@ -259,16 +259,6 @@ static void sem_rcu_free(struct rcu_head *head) ipc_rcu_free(head); } -/* - * spin_unlock_wait() and !spin_is_locked() are not memory barriers, they - * are only control barriers. - * The code must pair with spin_unlock(&sem->lock) or - * spin_unlock(&sem_perm.lock), thus just the control barrier is insufficient. - * - * smp_rmb() is sufficient, as writes cannot pass the control barrier. - */ -#define ipc_smp_acquire__after_spin_is_unlocked() smp_rmb() - /* * Wait until all currently ongoing simple ops have completed. * Caller must own sem_perm.lock. @@ -292,7 +282,6 @@ static void sem_wait_array(struct sem_array *sma) sem = sma->sem_base + i; spin_unlock_wait(&sem->lock); } - ipc_smp_acquire__after_spin_is_unlocked(); } /* @@ -350,7 +339,7 @@ static inline int sem_lock(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops, * complex_count++; * spin_unlock(sem_perm.lock); */ - ipc_smp_acquire__after_spin_is_unlocked(); + smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); /* * Now repeat the test of complex_count: -- cgit v1.2.3-54-g00ecf