From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Darren Hart Subject: Re: [PATCH] futex: Detect mismatched requeue targets Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:51:21 -0700 Message-ID: <4ADE3EE9.3090308@us.ibm.com> References: <1953271756.544571256071596329.JavaMail.root@zmail07.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org To: John Kacur Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1953271756.544571256071596329.JavaMail.root@zmail07.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org John Kacur wrote: > ----- "Darren Hart" wrote: > >> John Kacur wrote: >>> Hello Darren >>> >>> I took your patch from commit >> 84bc4af59081ee974dd80210e694ab59ebe51ce8 >>> and I tried to git-cherry-pick it for v2.6.31.4-rt14 >>> >>> I had a little merge-commit to resolve. That wasn't too hard, but as >> the >>> code is a bit different between the two versions, I would appreciate >> it if >>> you could review the patch, and make sure that it still makes sense >> for >>> v2.6.31.r-rt14 >> Hi John, >> >> It looks good to me. Where did you have the conflicts? >> >> -- > > The conflict was in the futex_wait_requeue_pi function. > That's where you really need to double check that the logic still makes sense. Hi John, Yes, I suspect the conflict was do to the retry: label. You should have already pulled in the spurious wakeup patch, so you should be fine. The patch looks good to me. Thanks, -- Darren Hart IBM Linux Technology Center Real-Time Linux Team