lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: Runtime trouble with commit dbd952127d (seccomp: introduce writer locking)
From
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
> That means that the broken configuration is (CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK=n,
> CONFIG_SMP=n).
> It also means that the BUG_ON checks introduced with the seccomp commit
> will cause this configuration to fail hard at least for architectures where
> CONFIG_SMP
> can be disabled, and if those architectures use
> include/linux/spinlock_types_up.h.

Yes. This is why we have "assert_spin_locked()". You can't use
BUG_ON(spin_is_locked()), and !spin_is_locked() tends to be even worse
unless you can prove that nobody else can get the lock simultaneously.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-08-10 23:21    [W:0.069 / U:0.444 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site