public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [RFC-patch] Doc/lockdep-design:  explain display of {state-bits}
@ 2006-09-15 19:02 Jim Cromie
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Jim Cromie @ 2006-09-15 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Linux kernel


Please offer corrections / wording improvements as appropriate.
In particular, the ".+-? " table could be more illuminating - I lack the
knowledge to make the right inferences..

(or just take it, and run with it ;-)

Signed-off-by:  Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@gmail.com>

--- doc-touches/Documentation/lockdep-design.txt~	2006-09-14 11:49:47.000000000 -0600
+++ doc-touches/Documentation/lockdep-design.txt	2006-09-15 12:46:34.000000000 -0600
@@ -36,6 +36,28 @@
 
 - 'ever used'                                       [ == !unused        ]
 
+When mutex rules are violated, these 4 state bits are presented in the
+mutex error messages, inside curlies.  A contrived example:
+
+   modprobe/2287 is trying to acquire lock:
+    (&sio_locks[i].lock){--..}, at: [<c02867fd>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24
+
+   but task is already holding lock:
+    (&sio_locks[i].lock){--..}, at: [<c02867fd>] mutex_lock+0x21/0x24
+
+
+The bit position indicates hardirq, softirq, hardirq-read,
+softirq-read respectively, and the character displayed in each
+indicates:
+
+   '.'	 used
+   '+'  used in irqs
+   '-'  enabled in irqs
+   '?'  used and enabled (bits 3,4)
+
+Unused mutexes cannot be part of the cause of an error.
+
+
 Single-lock state rules:
 ------------------------
 



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2006-09-15 19:02 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-09-15 19:02 [RFC-patch] Doc/lockdep-design: explain display of {state-bits} Jim Cromie

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox