[<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