[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1301402942.14261.266.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:49:02 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] seqlock,lockdep: Add lock primitives to read_seqbegin().
On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 13:30 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> I made a small test module (which should work on 2.6.38.2).
Thanks! I'll take a look at this later today.
>
> ---------- locktest.c start ----------
[...]
> ---------- Makefile end ----------
>
> Below are my testcases and results (gcc 3.3 / x86_32).
> Kernel config is at http://I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp/tmp/config-2.6.38.2 .
>
> ---------- Testcase 1 ----------
>
> # cat /proc/locktest1
> # cat /proc/locktest2
> # cat /proc/locktest1
> # cat /proc/locktest2
> # cat /proc/locktest1
> # cat /proc/locktest2
>
> showed nothing in dmesg.
>
> ---------- Testcase 2 ----------
>
> # cat /proc/locktest1
> # cat /proc/locktest2
> # cat /proc/locktest3
>
> showed below message.
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.38.2 #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
[...]
> Well... did I misuse spinlock primitives in read_seqbegin2()?
> Anyway, lockdep should catch testcase 1.
Strange. I'll investigate this further.
Thanks,
-- 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