From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751025AbWDRNzp (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:55:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751028AbWDRNzo (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:55:44 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.55]:30418 "EHLO ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751021AbWDRNzo (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:55:44 -0400 Subject: Re: [RT] bad BUG_ON in rtmutex.c From: Steven Rostedt To: Daniel Walker Cc: Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , LKML In-Reply-To: <1145368228.17085.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145324887.17085.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145362851.5447.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145365886.5447.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145368228.17085.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:55:32 -0400 Message-Id: <1145368532.17085.88.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 09:50 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > BUT! I need to take another good look at the code, and maybe my > previous example of the failed BUG_ON is really a clue that there exists > a deeper bug. If the processes D and E from my last example were of > different priorities, but still higher than A, could the end result be > setting A to the lower of the two? This would be a bug, because then A > would not inherit the correct priority! OK, this shouldn't be a problem (answering my own question ;). The setting of the task's prio is done by __rt_mutex_adjust_prio(task) and this sets the task's prio to the highest prio task that is blocked on a lock own by "task", or to "task"s original prio if that is higher. So nevermind. -- Steve