From 8fe46535e10dbfebad68ad9f2f8260e49f5852c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 17:00:05 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] rtmutex: Check explicit for TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT.
Git-commit: 8fe46535e10dbfebad68ad9f2f8260e49f5852c9
Patch-mainline: v5.16-rc1
References: bsc#1190137 bsc#1189998

rt_mutex_wake_q_add() needs to  need to distiguish between sleeping
locks (TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT) and normal locks which use TASK_NORMAL to use
the proper wake mechanism.

Instead of checking for != TASK_NORMAL make it more robust and check
explicit for TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT which is the reason why a different wake
mechanism is used.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210928150006.597310-2-bigeasy@linutronix.de
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de> 

---
 kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index 6bb116c559b4..cafc259ec59d 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -449,7 +449,7 @@ static __always_inline void rt_mutex_adjust_prio(struct task_struct *p)
 static __always_inline void rt_mutex_wake_q_add(struct rt_wake_q_head *wqh,
 						struct rt_mutex_waiter *w)
 {
-	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && w->wake_state != TASK_NORMAL) {
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && w->wake_state == TASK_RTLOCK_WAIT) {
 		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING))
 			WARN_ON_ONCE(wqh->rtlock_task);
 		get_task_struct(w->task);
-- 
2.26.2