forked from Minki/linux
ACPICA: Fix allowable release order for ASL mutex objects
The ACPI 4.0 specification has been changed to make the SyncLevel for mutex objects more useful. When releasing a mutex, the synclevel of the mutex must now be the same as the current sync level. This makes more sense. This change updates the code to match the spec. Signed-off-by: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
10a3b461a2
commit
315c728887
@ -402,10 +402,14 @@ acpi_ex_release_mutex(union acpi_operand_object *obj_desc,
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* The sync level of the mutex must be less than or equal to the current
|
||||
* sync level
|
||||
* The sync level of the mutex must be equal to the current sync level. In
|
||||
* other words, the current level means that at least one mutex at that
|
||||
* level is currently being held. Attempting to release a mutex of a
|
||||
* different level can only mean that the mutex ordering rule is being
|
||||
* violated. This behavior is clarified in ACPI 4.0 specification.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (obj_desc->mutex.sync_level > walk_state->thread->current_sync_level) {
|
||||
if (obj_desc->mutex.sync_level !=
|
||||
walk_state->thread->current_sync_level) {
|
||||
ACPI_ERROR((AE_INFO,
|
||||
"Cannot release Mutex [%4.4s], SyncLevel mismatch: mutex %d current %d",
|
||||
acpi_ut_get_node_name(obj_desc->mutex.node),
|
||||
@ -423,10 +427,13 @@ acpi_ex_release_mutex(union acpi_operand_object *obj_desc,
|
||||
walk_state->thread->acquired_mutex_list->mutex.original_sync_level;
|
||||
|
||||
status = acpi_ex_release_mutex_object(obj_desc);
|
||||
if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
|
||||
return_ACPI_STATUS(status);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (obj_desc->mutex.acquisition_depth == 0) {
|
||||
|
||||
/* Restore the original sync_level */
|
||||
/* Restore the previous sync_level */
|
||||
|
||||
walk_state->thread->current_sync_level = previous_sync_level;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user