From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtmutex.c: Fix incorrect waiter check Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 17:10:31 +0100 Message-ID: <20150217161031.GT26177@linutronix.de> References: <548F7E4C.90805@hp.com> <1421269898-30591-1-git-send-email-brad.mouring@ni.com> <1421269898-30591-2-git-send-email-brad.mouring@ni.com> <20150121151352.7e4ef150@gandalf.local.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Brad Mouring , Paul McKenney , linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, T Makphaibulchoke , Brad Mouring , Thomas Gleixner To: Steven Rostedt Return-path: Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:44258 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750800AbbBQQKg (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Feb 2015 11:10:36 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150121151352.7e4ef150@gandalf.local.home> Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: * Steven Rostedt | 2015-01-21 15:13:52 [-0500]: >On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 15:11:38 -0600 >"Brad Mouring" wrote: > >> In task_blocks_on_lock, there's a null check on pi_blocked_on >> of the task_struct. This pointer can encode the fact that the >> task that contains the pointer is waking (preventing requeuing) >> and therefore is non-null. Use the inline function to avoid >> dereferencing an invalid "pointer" > >Yep, this looks legit. I can apply it to the series I maintain. I added it to v3.18 with a stable tag. I don't know why this did not pop-up earlier or if this is part of the rtmutex re-write. >-- Steve Sebastian