From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John David Anglin Subject: Re: futex wait failure Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:40:45 -0500 Message-ID: <20100311224044.GA18789@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> References: <20100307171207.GA22856@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> <20100307203230.CAC964E77@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> <20100311032049.GA14312@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> <20100311135418.GA22698@bombadil.infradead.org> Reply-To: John David Anglin Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: John David Anglin , deller@gmx.de, carlos@systemhalted.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org To: Kyle McMartin Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100311135418.GA22698@bombadil.infradead.org> List-ID: List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Kyle McMartin wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:20:49PM -0500, John David Anglin wrote: > > > I have the feeling that Helge's patch helps (possible resolves) the > > > minifail bug. > > > > With further testing, I find that the patch doesn't resolve the minifail > > fails on my c3750. > > > > Bummer. :( Yes. I am 95% certain that the bug has to do with the clone implementation and scheduling. I have attached another version of the minifail test. The loops after the fork and pthread_create calls are to isolate these syscalls. Typically, I see something like: Core was generated by `./minifail9s'. Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. #0 0x00000000 in ?? () (gdb) info thread 2 Thread 11537 pure_test () at minifail9.cpp:51 * 1 Thread 11538 0x00000000 in ?? () Thread 2 is in the pure_test loop after the fork call. The cause of the failure is not at all obvious to me but I am a bit concerned about the sys_clone implementation. Is it possible that the struct pt_regs gets clobbered? Dave -- J. David Anglin dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)