Hi,
Because the type of brlock_read_lock_t can vary depending on
whether SPINLOCK_DEBUG is defined, I suspect that the initialisation
of __brlock_array in lib/brlock.c is incorrect.
I suspect the initialisation in the __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS case whould
be to RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED, not zero. Otherwise, nasty things will happen
-- and wakeups may be missed on i386 (the rwlock_t should be initialised to
-MAXINT-1 for i386, not zero, as the transition from negative->positive
is used to trigger wakeups. Other architectures have other requirements)
--- /tmp/geta28567 Tue Apr 16 08:19:38 2002
+++ linux-2.5/lib/brlock.c Tue Apr 16 08:16:22 2002
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
#ifdef __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS
brlock_read_lock_t __brlock_array[NR_CPUS][__BR_IDX_MAX] =
- { [0 ... NR_CPUS-1] = { [0 ... __BR_IDX_MAX-1] = {0, 0} } };
+ { [0 ... NR_CPUS-1] = { [0 ... __BR_IDX_MAX-1] = RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED } };
void __br_write_lock (enum brlock_indices idx)
{
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 15 2002 - 22:00:25 EST