lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [TIP][RFC 4/7] futex: finish_futex_lock_pi()
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Darren Hart wrote:
>> + } else {
>> + /* dvhart FIXME: can't we just BUG_ON in this case?
>
> No. There is no reason to crash the kernel if this happens. All what
> happens is that a userspace application becomes a bit unhappy.
>
> I did not put a WARN_ON there as the stack trace is known, but we
> could do a WARN to trigger the kerneloops detector.

OK, no need for a change. Easy enough to add debug if someone were to
hit it.

>
>> + * Paranoia check. If we did not take the lock in the trylock
>> + * above, then we should not be the owner of the rtmutex,
>> + * neither the real nor the pending one:
>> + */
>> + if (rt_mutex_owner(&q->pi_state->pi_mutex) == current)
>> + printk(KERN_ERR "finish_futex_lock_pi: "
>> + "ret = %d pi-mutex: %p "
>> + "pi-state %p\n", ret,
>> + q->pi_state->pi_mutex.owner,
>> + q->pi_state->owner);
>> + }
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx


--
Darren Hart
IBM Linux Technology Center
Real-Time Linux Team


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-09 19:09    [W:0.052 / U:0.392 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site