From: Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com>
To: Yichen Xie <yxie@cs.stanford.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUGS] [CHECKER] 99 synchronization bugs and a lock summary database
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 14:35:24 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040702043524.GA1203@frodo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0407011747040.4015-100000@kaki.stanford.edu>
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 06:01:00PM -0700, Yichen Xie wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi there,
> We are a group of researchers at Stanford working on program analysis
> algorithms. We have been building a precision enhanced program analysis
> engine at Stanford, and our first application was to derive mutex/lock
> behavior in the linux kernel. In the process, we found 99 likely
> synchronization errors in linux kernel version 2.6.5:
>
> http://glide.stanford.edu/linux-lock/err1.html (69 errors)
> http://glide.stanford.edu/linux-lock/err2.html (30 errors)
>
> ...
>
> As always, feedbacks and confirmations will be greatly appreciated!
>From looking through the XFS reports, I suspect your tools aren't
following the sv_wait semantics correctly (or else I'm misreading
the code). Many of the reported XFS items stem from this - e.g.
this one...
[NOTE] BUG forgot to unlock before "goto try_again" (line 2293)
ERROR: fs/xfs/xfs_log.c:2948: lock check failed!
ERROR: fs/xfs/xfs_log.c:xlog_state_sync
the code in question does this:
try_again:
s = LOG_LOCK(log); /* spin_lock(&log->l_icloglock); */
...
sv_wait(&iclog->ic_prev->ic_writesema, PSWP,
&log->l_icloglock, s);
already_slept = 1;
goto try_again;
and the tools seem to be missing that the log->l_icloglock is
unlocked by the sv_wait routine. Well, that or I've overlooked
something that the tools have not. :)
A couple of the others were definately missed unlocks on error
paths though (fixed now) - thanks!
cheers.
--
Nathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-02 3:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-02 1:01 [BUGS] [CHECKER] 99 synchronization bugs and a lock summary database Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 4:35 ` Nathan Scott [this message]
2004-07-02 7:06 ` Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 7:44 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-02 16:48 ` Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 20:42 ` Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 21:12 ` Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 22:50 ` J. Bruce Fields
2004-07-02 23:44 ` Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 4:38 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-02 7:20 ` Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 7:33 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-02 7:39 ` Martin Diehl
2004-07-02 10:00 ` Matthias Urlichs
2004-07-02 22:32 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-02 8:15 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-02 16:53 ` Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 8:19 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-02 16:39 ` Yichen Xie
2004-07-02 17:00 ` J. Bruce Fields
2004-07-02 8:47 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
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=20040702043524.GA1203@frodo \
--to=nathans@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yxie@cs.stanford.edu \
/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