[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 07:40:10 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc: Brad Mouring <bmouring@...com>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] rtmutex: Handle when top lock owner changes
On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 17:32:37 +0200 (CEST)
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> + /*
> + * When we dropped the spinlocks, if the owner of the lock we
> + * are currently processing changed since we chain walked
> + * to that lock, we are done with the chain walk. The previous
> + * owner was obviously running to release it.
> + */
> + if (lock && rt_mutex_owner(lock) != task)
> + goto out_unlock_pi;
NO. You CANNOT derefernce lock after dropping the locks. It might be
gone already.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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