[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131211000504.GA13710@home.goodmis.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 19:05:04 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Subject: Re: process 'stuck' at exit.
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 06:00:09PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> The only thing I'm still unclear on, is how that pid allegedly wasn't doing
> a futex call as part of its run. The only thing I can think of is that
> the other pid that _did_ do a futex call did it on a page that was MAP_SHARED
> between all the other children, and this 'spin forever' thing only
> happens when the last process with a reference on that page exits ?
Which thread did not do the futex call? The one that was spinning? No, that one
most definitely was, at least according to the stack trace trace you posted:
trinity-child27-10818 [001] 89790.703547: kernel_stack: <stack trace>
=> futex_requeue (ffffffff810df18a)
=> do_futex (ffffffff810e019e)
=> SyS_futex (ffffffff810e0de1)
=> tracesys (ffffffff81760be4)
It did a futex() system call.
Or are you talking about another thread?
-- 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