[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: rtmutex assert failure (was [Patch] restore the RCU callback...)


On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 11:33:59AM -0700, Robert Crocombe wrote:
> On 8/26/06, hui Bill Huey <> wrote:
> >The function __put_task_struct() should never show up a stack trace
> >EVER. That function has been rename under all things
> >under my addendum patches. That's why I'm starting to think it's your
> >build environment or you're miss applying the patches.
> but is it used?
> +void fastcall __put_task_struct(struct task_struct *task)
> +{
> + struct list_head *head;
> +
> + head = &get_cpu_var(delayed_put_task_struct_list);
> + list_add_tail(&task->delayed_drop, head);
> +
> + _wake_cpu_desched_task();
> +
> + put_cpu_var(delayed_put_task_struct_list);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> So I think you're mistaken. Patch is applied like this:

The patch is applied correctly.

This is what I'm having a problem with in your stack trace...

I was unclear in explain that __put_task_struct() should never
appear with free_task() in a stack trace as you can clearly see
from the implementation. All it's suppose to do is wake a thread,
so "how?" you're getting those things simultaneously in the stack
trace is completely baffling to me. Could you double check to see
if it's booting the right kernel ? maybe make sure that's calling
that version of the function with printks or something ?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-08-28 22:33    [W:0.127 / U:42.640 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site