[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120720133501.GA30826@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 09:35:01 -0400
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Darren Hart <darren@...art.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: 3.5-rc6 futex_wait_requeue_pi oops.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:53:45PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> >> I'll add a fix to that WARN_ON in my futex-fixes branch along with the
> >> fix for the bug Dan found.
> >
> > I think I have root cause. futex_wait_requeue_pi() doesn't like having
> > uaddr == uaddr2. The handle_early_wakeup() doesn't detect a problem
> > because key2 IS the same as key1, I think. I've just discovered this and
> > quickly hacked in a "if (uaddr==uaddr2) return -EINVAL" fix and the test
> > continues to run (with just ops 0, 11, 12) for several minutes now
> > (typically fails in a few seconds). I'll let it run for a few hours and
> > contemplate the proper fix.
>
> Dave, mind giving this a spin? It seems to be doing the trick here,
> at least for the *REQUEUE_PI futex op codes in trinity.
Yeah, looks like that does the trick!
thanks,
Dave
--
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