[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:2.397 / U:5.284 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site