[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <500974CD.7090804@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 08:10:05 -0700
From: Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
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 07/20/2012 06:35 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> 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!
It ran all night without an issue here too. I'll roll these up and send
them out shortly.
Dave, I love/hate trinity. ;-)
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
--
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