qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	Yury Kotov <yury-kotov@yandex-team.ru>,
	"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] qemu-thread: Strict unlock check
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2022 14:16:44 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y0cEjAT6yMX/Xasv@x1n> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221011224154.644379-1-peterx@redhat.com>

On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 06:41:52PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> NOTE: mark patchset RFC because "make check" will easily fail; but I didn't
> yet dig into why as I'm not familiar with the code paths that triggers, it
> can be bugs hidden or something I missed.  So RFC to just have some thoughts.

I just noticed (after reminded from Dave) that the reclock was actually the
recursive lock, which definitely won't work with patch 2 at all.

OTOH I also noticed PTHREAD_MUTEX_ERRORCHECK which does the same unlock
check that we can leverage (and it'll also check re-lock from the same
thread which causes deadlock).  I'll give that a shot instead.

Please ignore this version.  Patch 1 is still meaningful I think, but
anyway I'll repost.  Sorry for the noise.

-- 
Peter Xu



  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-10-12 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-11 22:41 [PATCH RFC 0/2] qemu-thread: Strict unlock check Peter Xu
2022-10-11 22:41 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] qemu-thread: Enable the new timedwait to use DEBUG_MUTEX too Peter Xu
2022-10-11 22:41 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] qemu-thread: Fail hard for suspecious mutex unlocks Peter Xu
2022-10-12 18:16 ` Peter Xu [this message]
2022-10-13 10:31   ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] qemu-thread: Strict unlock check Peter Maydell
2022-10-13 15:05     ` Peter Xu

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=Y0cEjAT6yMX/Xasv@x1n \
    --to=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=yury-kotov@yandex-team.ru \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).