Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1182127 > unrolled thread

Re: [BUG][tip/master] kernel panic while locking selftest at qspinlock_paravirt.h:137!

Started byIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
First post2015-07-11 12:30 +0200
Last post2015-07-11 12:30 +0200
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [BUG][tip/master] kernel panic while locking selftest at  qspinlock_paravirt.h:137! Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-07-11 12:30 +0200

#1182127 — Re: [BUG][tip/master] kernel panic while locking selftest at qspinlock_paravirt.h:137!

FromIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Date2015-07-11 12:30 +0200
SubjectRe: [BUG][tip/master] kernel panic while locking selftest at qspinlock_paravirt.h:137!
Message-ID<pL0cG-20i-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 03:57:46PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > > Do we want to make double unlock non-fatal unconditionally?
> > 
> > No, just don't BUG() out, don't crash the system - generate a warning?
> 
> So that would be a yes..
> 
> Something like so then? Won't this generate a splat on that locking self
> test then? And upset people?
> 
> ---
>  kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h | 8 +++++++-
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
> index 04ab18151cc8..286e8978a562 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
> +++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
> @@ -133,8 +133,14 @@ static struct pv_node *pv_unhash(struct qspinlock *lock)
>  	 * This guarantees a limited lookup time and is itself guaranteed by
>  	 * having the lock owner do the unhash -- IFF the unlock sees the
>  	 * SLOW flag, there MUST be a hash entry.
> +	 *
> +	 * This can trigger due to double-unlock. In which case, return a
> +	 * random pointer so that __pv_queued_spin_unlock() can dereference it
> +	 * without crashing.
>  	 */
> -	BUG();
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(true);
> +
> +	return (struct pv_node *)this_cpu_ptr(&mcs_nodes[0]);

Yeah, just please also use debug_locks_silent to make the self-test execute 
properly or so.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web