Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:02:46 -0600 | From | Jim Cromie <> | Subject | [RFC-patch] Doc/lockdep-design: explain display of {state-bits} |
| |
Please offer corrections / wording improvements as appropriate. In particular, the ".+-? " table could be more illuminating - I lack the knowledge to make the right inferences..
(or just take it, and run with it ;-)
Signed-off-by: Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@gmail.com>
--- doc-touches/Documentation/lockdep-design.txt~ 2006-09-14 11:49:47.000000000 -0600 +++ doc-touches/Documentation/lockdep-design.txt 2006-09-15 12:46:34.000000000 -0600 @@ -36,6 +36,28 @@ - 'ever used' [ == !unused ] +When mutex rules are violated, these 4 state bits are presented in the +mutex error messages, inside curlies. A contrived example: + + modprobe/2287 is trying to acquire lock: + (&sio_locks[i].lock){--..}, at: [<c02867fd>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24 + + but task is already holding lock: + (&sio_locks[i].lock){--..}, at: [<c02867fd>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24 + + +The bit position indicates hardirq, softirq, hardirq-read, +softirq-read respectively, and the character displayed in each +indicates: + + '.' used + '+' used in irqs + '-' enabled in irqs + '?' used and enabled (bits 3,4) + +Unused mutexes cannot be part of the cause of an error. + + Single-lock state rules: ------------------------
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |