From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754075AbbJPKbd (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 16 Oct 2015 06:31:33 -0400
Received: from e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com ([195.75.94.108]:37152 "EHLO
	e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753264AbbJPKbb (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 16 Oct 2015 06:31:31 -0400
X-IBM-Helo: d06dlp03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com
X-IBM-MailFrom: heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com
X-IBM-RcptTo: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:31:23 +0200
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: futex timeout not working? (bisected)
Message-ID: <20151016103123.GE4684@osiris>
References: <20151015104347.GA4166@osiris>
 <alpine.DEB.2.11.1510161218400.3960@nanos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1510161218400.3960@nanos>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER
x-cbid: 15101610-0009-0000-0000-000005F21044
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:21:51PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Heiko,
> 
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> >   /* We wait for half a second.  */
> >   ts.tv_nsec += 500000000;
> >   if (ts.tv_nsec >= 1000000000)
> >     {
> >       ++ts.tv_sec;
> >       ts.tv_nsec -= 1000000000;
> >     }
> > 
> >   ret = syscall (__NR_futex, &futex_word, op, expected, ts, NULL, FUTEX_BITSET_MATCH_ANY);
> 
> If you actually hand in a pointer to 'ts' then the program works as
> expected even with the commit in question applied.

Yes, sorry about that! I was just about to write that this should have
been &ts on x86. Since x86 seems to pass also structures >8 bytes by
value.

However on s390 it is passed by reference. So even it I change ts to &ts,
it will hang as I described.

So you are saying this works on x86 and it must be some s390 specific bug?