Re: PI BUG with -rt13

Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-11-22T09:31:47Z

On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 07:24:55PM -0800, david singleton wrote:
>
>
> Dinakar,
> can you try the attached patch? I believe it has the fix you
> require. It has the
> correct locking fix I just sent, the patch-2.6.4-rt13-rf2, and has the
> correct
> lock order in the exit path that was causing the circular deadlock in
> Dave Carlson's
> application.

David,

This fixes the problem that I was noticing !!
Thank you and Ingo for fixing this

-Dinakar

>
> On Nov 21, 2005, at 1:26 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >* David Singleton <dsingleton@mvista.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Ingo,
> >> here is a patch that provides the correct locking for the rt_mutex
> >>backing the robust pthread_mutex. The patch also unifies the locking
> >>for all the robust functions and adds support for pthread_mutexes on
> >>the heap.
> >
> >thanks. Could you split up the patch into a fix and a 'heap' patch (at
> >a
> >minimum)?
> >
> >it's this portion of the 'heap' patch that looks problematic:
> >
> >>--- base/linux-2.6.14/include/linux/mm.h 2005-11-18
> >>20:36:53.000000000 -0800
> >>+++ wip/linux-2.6.14/include/linux/mm.h 2005-11-21
> >>10:51:19.000000000 -0800
> >>@@ -109,6 +109,11 @@
> >> #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> >> struct mempolicy *vm_policy; /* NUeMA policy for the VMA */
> >> #endif
> >>+#ifdef CONFIG_FUTEX
> >>+ int robust_init; /* robust initialized? */
> >>+ struct list_head robust_list; /* list of robust futexes in this
> >>vma */
> >>+ struct semaphore robust_sem; /* semaphore to protect the list */
> >>+#endif
> >> };
> >
> >why is there per-vma info needed?
> >
> >Also, what testing did this patch have - should it solve Dinakar's
> >problem(s)?
> >
> > Ingo