[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <874km5mnbf.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Wed, 04 Nov 2020 11:24:52 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
        Gratian Crisan <gratian.crisan@...com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
        Brandon Streiff <brandon.streiff@...com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        James Minor <james.minor@...com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: BUG_ON(!newowner) in fixup_pi_state_owner()
On Wed, Nov 04 2020 at 08:42, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-11-04 at 01:56 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> --- a/kernel/futex.c
> +++ b/kernel/futex.c
> @@ -2383,7 +2383,18 @@ static int fixup_pi_state_owner(u32 __us
>  		 * Since we just failed the trylock; there must be an owner.
>  		 */
>  		newowner = rt_mutex_owner(&pi_state->pi_mutex);
> -		BUG_ON(!newowner);
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Why? Because I know what I'm doing with these beasts?  Nope,
> +		 * but what the hell, a busy restart loop let f_boosted become
> +		 * owner, so go for it. Box still boots, works, no longer makes
> +		 * boom with fbomb_v2, and as an added bonus, didn't even blow
> +		 * futextests all up.  Maybe it'll help... or not, we'll see.
> +		 */
> +		if (unlikely(!newowner)) {
> +			err = -EAGAIN;
> +			goto handle_err;
Yes, that cures it, but does not really explain why newowner is
NULL. Lemme stare more.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
