[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1180574993.21781.22.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 21:29:53 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sripathi Kodi <sripathik@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] futex_unlock_pi() hurts my brain and may cause
application deadlock
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 17:49 -0700, john stultz wrote:
> ...
> retry_locked:
> /*
> * To avoid races, try to do the TID -> 0 atomic transition
> * again. If it succeeds then we can return without waking
> * anyone else up:
> */
> if (!(uval & FUTEX_OWNER_DIED)) {
> pagefault_disable();
> uval = futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic(uaddr, current->pid, 0);
> pagefault_enable();
> }
My question is to all the futex gurus out there.
This code is in futex_unlock_pi. Can the owner of the mutex really die?
Isn't the owner the one doing the unlock?
-- Steve
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists