From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "lkml, " <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Dinakar Guniguntala <dino@in.ibm.com>,
"Stultz, John" <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: futex: make futex_lock_pi interruptible
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:13:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200910301013.46923.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AEA4547.30102@us.ibm.com>
On Friday 30 October 2009, Darren Hart wrote:
> Darren Hart wrote:
> This appears to work fine. Can anyone think of a reason why this is an unsafe
> thing to do? I'll have to create a much more elaborate test case and review
> the glibc code of course to make sure the glibc mutex state isn't compromised.
The only reason I can see against it is the need to use one of the
rt signal numbers from library code, which may conflict with other
users of the signal. Being able to avoid a signal altogether would
be really nice, as in the futex_cancel extension you mentioned.
> /* Need some kind of per-thread variable here */
> jmp_buf env;
> pthread_mutex_t mutex;
Maybe instead of per-thread variables (which should work
fine), you could do
typedef struct {
jmp_buf env;
pthread_mutex_t mutex;
} interruptible_mutex_t;
> /* ensure the child has blocked on the lock */
> sleep(1);
In a real application, you might want to add some logic to avoid
this kind of race. For the test case, you probably need to do it
with the sleep.
Arnd <><
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-30 9:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-27 0:26 [PATCH] RFC: futex: make futex_lock_pi interruptible Darren Hart
2009-10-27 0:32 ` Darren Hart
2009-10-29 8:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-10-30 1:19 ` Darren Hart
2009-10-30 1:45 ` Darren Hart
2009-10-30 9:13 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2009-10-30 16:23 ` Darren Hart
2009-10-30 17:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-10-30 17:55 ` Chris Friesen
2009-10-31 0:31 ` Darren Hart
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=200910301013.46923.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=dino@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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