From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 References: <1461854390-27536-1-git-send-email-tbultel@free.fr> <20160429194018.GO1881@hermes.click-hack.org> <5723C928.3020400@free.fr> <20160429211504.GA1781@hermes.click-hack.org> From: Thierry Bultel Message-ID: <57247DCD.1080008@free.fr> Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 11:41:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160429211504.GA1781@hermes.click-hack.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Xenomai] [PATCH 1/1] posix skin: fix address passed to pse51_mutex_check_init in syscall List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Le 29/04/2016 23:15, Gilles Chanteperdrix a =E9crit : > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:50:48PM +0200, Thierry Bultel wrote: >> Le 29/04/2016 21:40, Gilles Chanteperdrix a =E9crit : >>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 04:39:50PM +0200, Thierry Bultel wrote: >>>> The address passed to pse51_mutex_check_init was the one of userland, >>>> not the kernel one. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Bultel >>>> --- >>>> ksrc/skins/posix/syscall.c | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/ksrc/skins/posix/syscall.c b/ksrc/skins/posix/syscall.c >>>> index 87b95fa..31e2705 100644 >>>> --- a/ksrc/skins/posix/syscall.c >>>> +++ b/ksrc/skins/posix/syscall.c >>>> @@ -1202,7 +1202,7 @@ static int __pthread_mutex_check_init(struct pt_= regs *regs) >>>> } else >>>> attr =3D NULL; >>>> =20 >>>> - return pse51_mutex_check_init(&umx->shadow_mutex, attr); >>>> + return pse51_mutex_check_init(&mx.shadow_mutex, attr); >>>> } >>> Ah, what a coincidence, Jan reported this issue a long time ago: >>> https://xenomai.org/pipermail/xenomai/2015-December/035656.html >>> and I have merged a patch for it just a few days ago in my local >>> branch (soon to be Xenomai 2.6.5). >>> >> As you probably read in my previous emails, I am currently achieving >> to port ipipe to 4.5. >> Whereas the existing version does not seem to make any problems >> with kernel 3.18.12, it does a kernel crash with 4.5. >> I did not investigate why this makes a difference. >> With the patch, the 'leaks' non regression test successfully passes. > Fine, but how is that relevant? The patch is already merged, and Jan > probably explained the reason for the crash. > Yes, absolutely. I was just wondering why this used to work with older kernels and why it does not any longer with newer ones.