Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964782AbWCNWA2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:00:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964785AbWCNWA2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:00:28 -0500 Received: from 213-239-205-147.clients.your-server.de ([213.239.205.147]:38815 "EHLO mail.tglx.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964782AbWCNWA0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:00:26 -0500 Subject: Re: 2.6.16-rc6-rt1 From: Thomas Gleixner Reply-To: tglx@linutronix.de To: Esben Nielsen Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:00:58 +0100 Message-Id: <1142373658.19916.655.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.5.5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1898 Lines: 43 On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 21:40 +0100, Esben Nielsen wrote: > The trick is: Maintain the unittest along with the code you are testing. > Unfortunately a lot of people haven't discovered that yet. As I said > before, the Linux kernel sould should have a tests/ directory in the main > directory and a "make tests". For any patch to be accepted, should "make > tests" should "build". Patches ofcouse include changes to the kernel code > and the tests/ directory as it is one distribution. Notice the tests are > run _without_ running the kernel! > That is how I do it at work: I have it all in one source repository and > the "tests" target is the first dependency of "all:" in the makefile. I did not say that a unittester is bad. It just does not help much when it only works on your workstation. > > The deadlock detection is done, when requested. So you _have_ to do it > > by following the lock chain. When the task goes to sleep, then there is > > no postmortem. When a futex requests deadlock detection you have to do > -------- > > it in the locking path, as you have to return that information to > > userspace. > > > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/pthread_mutex_lock.html > > > The point is that when deadlock detection isn't requested it ought not to > be forced on the application. It is not forced. We break out of the loop, when it is not requested. This is just combined PI / deadlock detection code. And we do the check in the boosting path anyway to avoid deadlocking there. Given it works :) > It happens before getting into that loop Grmbl, you are right. Fix follows. tglx - 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/