From 7e406d1ff39b8ee574036418a5043c86723170cf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2021 01:04:57 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Avoid double preemption in __cond_resched_*lock*()
Git-commit: 7e406d1ff39b8ee574036418a5043c86723170cf
Patch-mainline: v5.17-rc2
References: git-fixes

For PREEMPT/DYNAMIC_PREEMPT the *_unlock() will already trigger a
preemption, no point in then calling preempt_schedule_common()
*again*.

Use _cond_resched() instead, since this is a NOP for the preemptible
configs while it provide a preemption point for the others.

Reported-by: xuhaifeng <xuhaifeng@oppo.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YcGnvDEYBwOiV0cR@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbecker@suse.com>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c | 12 +++---------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 0d2ab2a2f9fe..56b428c8ea96 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -8218,9 +8218,7 @@ int __cond_resched_lock(spinlock_t *lock)
 
 	if (spin_needbreak(lock) || resched) {
 		spin_unlock(lock);
-		if (resched)
-			preempt_schedule_common();
-		else
+		if (!_cond_resched())
 			cpu_relax();
 		ret = 1;
 		spin_lock(lock);
@@ -8238,9 +8236,7 @@ int __cond_resched_rwlock_read(rwlock_t *lock)
 
 	if (rwlock_needbreak(lock) || resched) {
 		read_unlock(lock);
-		if (resched)
-			preempt_schedule_common();
-		else
+		if (!_cond_resched())
 			cpu_relax();
 		ret = 1;
 		read_lock(lock);
@@ -8258,9 +8254,7 @@ int __cond_resched_rwlock_write(rwlock_t *lock)
 
 	if (rwlock_needbreak(lock) || resched) {
 		write_unlock(lock);
-		if (resched)
-			preempt_schedule_common();
-		else
+		if (!_cond_resched())
 			cpu_relax();
 		ret = 1;
 		write_lock(lock);
-- 
2.34.1