From: Roger Larsson <roger.larsson@norran.net>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Nigel Gamble <nigel@nrg.org>
Subject: *_trylock return on success?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 16:07:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00112516072500.01122@dox> (raw)
Hi,
Background information:
compiled and tested a test11 with the Montavista preemptive patch.
After pressing Magic-SysRq-M all processes that tried to do IO hung in 'D'
Last message "Buffer memory ..."
Pressing Magic-SysRq-M again, all hung processes continued...
Checking the patch it looks like this
printk("Buffer memory: %6dkB\n",
atomic_read(&buffermem_pages) << (PAGE_SHIFT-10));
-#ifdef CONFIG_SMP /* trylock does nothing on UP and so we could deadlock */
- if (!spin_trylock(&lru_list_lock))
+#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT)
+ if (!mutex_trylock(&lru_list_mtx))
return;
for(nlist = 0; nlist < NR_LIST; nlist++) {
Ok, so I run some more code now than before (UP system with PREEMPT).
mutex_trylock is defined as:
+#define mutex_trylock(x) down_trylock(x)
Noticed that if the spin_trylock returns 0 on success, I will get the
behavior I see.
Not printing buffer info first time.
Holding the lock - stopping other fs processes.
Failing the mutex_trylock next attempt, interprete as success
- continuing and printing the buffer info.
- finally release the mutex
I removed the not (!) and now it works as expected.
Questions:
What are _trylocks supposed to return?
Does spin_trylock and down_trylock behave differently?
Why isn't the expected return value documented?
/RogerL
--
--
Home page:
http://www.norran.net/nra02596/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next reply other threads:[~2000-11-25 15:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-11-25 15:07 Roger Larsson [this message]
2000-11-25 17:49 ` *_trylock return on success? Rik van Riel
2000-11-25 18:30 ` Philipp Rumpf
2000-11-25 19:03 ` Roger Larsson
2000-11-25 19:22 ` Philipp Rumpf
2000-11-25 21:05 ` Roger Larsson
2000-11-28 1:07 ` Roger Larsson
2000-11-25 18:58 ` Roger Larsson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-12-04 19:46 george anzinger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=00112516072500.01122@dox \
--to=roger.larsson@norran.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nigel@nrg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox