Linux-2.6.12-rc2v2.6.12-rc2

Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.

Let it rip!

1 files changed, 140 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/arch/sh64/kernel/semaphore.c b/arch/sh64/kernel/semaphore.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..72c16533436e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/sh64/kernel/semaphore.c
@@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
+/*
+ * Just taken from alpha implementation.
+ * This can't work well, perhaps.
+ */
+/*
+ *  Generic semaphore code. Buyer beware. Do your own
+ * specific changes in <asm/semaphore-helper.h>
+ */
+
+#include <linux/errno.h>
+#include <linux/rwsem.h>
+#include <linux/sched.h>
+#include <linux/wait.h>
+#include <linux/init.h>
+#include <asm/semaphore.h>
+#include <asm/semaphore-helper.h>
+
+spinlock_t semaphore_wake_lock;
+
+/*
+ * Semaphores are implemented using a two-way counter:
+ * The "count" variable is decremented for each process
+ * that tries to sleep, while the "waking" variable is
+ * incremented when the "up()" code goes to wake up waiting
+ * processes.
+ *
+ * Notably, the inline "up()" and "down()" functions can
+ * efficiently test if they need to do any extra work (up
+ * needs to do something only if count was negative before
+ * the increment operation.
+ *
+ * waking_non_zero() (from asm/semaphore.h) must execute
+ * atomically.
+ *
+ * When __up() is called, the count was negative before
+ * incrementing it, and we need to wake up somebody.
+ *
+ * This routine adds one to the count of processes that need to
+ * wake up and exit.  ALL waiting processes actually wake up but
+ * only the one that gets to the "waking" field first will gate
+ * through and acquire the semaphore.  The others will go back
+ * to sleep.
+ *
+ * Note that these functions are only called when there is
+ * contention on the lock, and as such all this is the
+ * "non-critical" part of the whole semaphore business. The
+ * critical part is the inline stuff in <asm/semaphore.h>
+ * where we want to avoid any extra jumps and calls.
+ */
+void __up(struct semaphore *sem)
+{
+	wake_one_more(sem);
+	wake_up(&sem->wait);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Perform the "down" function.  Return zero for semaphore acquired,
+ * return negative for signalled out of the function.
+ *
+ * If called from __down, the return is ignored and the wait loop is
+ * not interruptible.  This means that a task waiting on a semaphore
+ * using "down()" cannot be killed until someone does an "up()" on
+ * the semaphore.
+ *
+ * If called from __down_interruptible, the return value gets checked
+ * upon return.  If the return value is negative then the task continues
+ * with the negative value in the return register (it can be tested by
+ * the caller).
+ *
+ * Either form may be used in conjunction with "up()".
+ *
+ */
+
+#define DOWN_VAR				\
+	struct task_struct *tsk = current;	\
+	wait_queue_t wait;			\
+	init_waitqueue_entry(&wait, tsk);
+
+#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state)						\
+									\
+									\
+	tsk->state = (task_state);					\
+	add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);				\
+									\
+	/*								\
+	 * Ok, we're set up.  sem->count is known to be less than zero	\
+	 * so we must wait.						\
+	 *								\
+	 * We can let go the lock for purposes of waiting.		\
+	 * We re-acquire it after awaking so as to protect		\
+	 * all semaphore operations.					\
+	 *								\
+	 * If "up()" is called before we call waking_non_zero() then	\
+	 * we will catch it right away.  If it is called later then	\
+	 * we will have to go through a wakeup cycle to catch it.	\
+	 *								\
+	 * Multiple waiters contend for the semaphore lock to see	\
+	 * who gets to gate through and who has to wait some more.	\
+	 */								\
+	for (;;) {
+
+#define DOWN_TAIL(task_state)			\
+		tsk->state = (task_state);	\
+	}					\
+	tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;		\
+	remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
+
+void __sched __down(struct semaphore * sem)
+{
+	DOWN_VAR
+	DOWN_HEAD(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
+	if (waking_non_zero(sem))
+		break;
+	schedule();
+	DOWN_TAIL(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE)
+}
+
+int __sched __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
+{
+	int ret = 0;
+	DOWN_VAR
+	DOWN_HEAD(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
+
+	ret = waking_non_zero_interruptible(sem, tsk);
+	if (ret)
+	{
+		if (ret == 1)
+			/* ret != 0 only if we get interrupted -arca */
+			ret = 0;
+		break;
+	}
+	schedule();
+	DOWN_TAIL(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
+	return ret;
+}
+
+int __down_trylock(struct semaphore * sem)
+{
+	return waking_non_zero_trylock(sem);
+}