[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1484346315.5606.313.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 23:25:15 +0100
From: Torvald Riegel <triegel@...hat.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: GLIBC Devel <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
"Zijlstra, Peter" <peter.zijlstra@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Subject: Re: Robust futexes: lost wakeups and design flaws in the
glibc/kernel synchronization scheme
On Thu, 2017-01-12 at 10:39 +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-12-24 at 17:01 +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > === Robust mutexes have bugs, in both glibc and the kernel
> >
> > I've been reviewing the implementation of robust mutexes in both glibc
> > and the kernel support code recently because there are several bug
> > reports, for example:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401665
> > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19402
> > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14485
> >
> > This review revealed a bunch of bugs. I have committed/proposed patches
> > that fix all glibc-only bugs that I am aware of:
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-12/msg00587.html
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-12/msg00862.html
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-12/msg00863.html
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-12/msg00947.html
These patches are now all committed to glibc master. Thus, you can
start fixing/testing now and have a high probability that you won't run
into glibc bugs.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists