[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48AD7705.2000404@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:09:09 +0200
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
CC: jmerkey@...fmountaingroup.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] mdb: Merkey's Linux Kernel Debugger 2.6.27-rc4 released
Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Thursday 21 August 2008 22:26, jmerkey@...fmountaingroup.com wrote:
>> It's simple to reproduce. Take away the volatile declaration for the
>> rlock_t structure in mdb-ia32.c (rlock_t debug_lock) in all code
>> references and watch the thing lock up in SMP with multiple processors in
>> the debugger each stuck with their own local copy of debug_lock.
>
> You should disable preempt before getting the processor id. Can't see any
> other possible bugs, but you should be able to see from the disassembly
> pretty easily.
debug_lock() is AFAICS only called from contexts which have preemption
disabled. Last time around I recommended to Jeff to document this
requirement on the calling context.
But even though preemption is disabled, debug_lock() is still incorrect
as I mentioned in my other post a minute ago. It corrupts its .flags
and .count members. (Or maybe it coincidentally doesn't as long as
volatile is around.)
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- =--- =-=-=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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