lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: WARN_ON_ONCE(!new_owner) within wake_futex_pi() triggerede
On Fri, 1 Feb 2019, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 06:06:53PM +0100, Sebastian Sewior wrote:
> > On 2019-01-31 17:52:28 [+0100], Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > ...nevertheless Stefan and I looked through the lovely disassembly of
> > > _pthread_mutex_lock_full() to verify if the compiler barriers are
> > > actually doing what they are supposed to do. The generated code
> > > however does look correct.
> > > So, it must be something different.
> >
> > would it make sense to use one locking function instead all three (lock,
> > try-lock, timed) in the test case to figure out if this is related to
> > one of the locking function?
>
> I tried all three variants, but it seems to be close to impossible to
> re-create then. I had a single fail when using only the trylock
> variant, but I wouldn't say that means anything.
>
> Only if all three variants run in parallel it seems to be quite
> reliably reproducible, even though sometimes it still takes an hour.

Were you able to capture a trace with the last set of additional trace
printks?

Thanks,

tglx

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-01 22:59    [W:0.100 / U:6.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site