Re: rtmutex assert failure (was [Patch] restore the RCU callback...)

[hui]

[...resend...]

On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 11:33:59AM -0700, Robert Crocombe wrote:
> On 8/26/06, hui Bill Huey <billh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >The function __put_task_struct() should never show up a stack trace
> >EVER. That function has been rename under all things
> >CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> >under my addendum patches. That's why I'm starting to think it's your
> >build environment or you're miss applying the patches.
>
> but is it used?
...
> +void fastcall __put_task_struct(struct task_struct *task)
> +{
> +       struct list_head *head;
> +
> +       head = &get_cpu_var(delayed_put_task_struct_list);
> +       list_add_tail(&task->delayed_drop, head);
> +
> +       _wake_cpu_desched_task();
> +
> +       put_cpu_var(delayed_put_task_struct_list);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>
> So I think you're mistaken.  Patch is applied like this:

The patch is applied correctly.

This is what I'm having a problem with in your stack trace...

I was unclear in explain that __put_task_struct() should never
appear with free_task() in a stack trace as you can clearly see
from the implementation. All it's suppose to do is wake a thread,
so "how?" you're getting those things simultaneously in the stack
trace is completely baffling to me. Could you double check to see
if it's booting the right kernel ? maybe make sure that's calling
that version of the function with printks or something ?

bill

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