Re: [BUGS] [CHECKER] 99 synchronization bugs and a lock summarydatabase

[Yichen Xie]

Indeed, it missed the locking semantics of sem_revalidate. I'll look into
designing a spec language to teach the tool about simple cases like this..
-yichen

On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:

> Yichen Xie <yxie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >     http://glide.stanford.edu/linux-lock/err1.html (69 errors)
> 
> ipc/sem.c:find_undo() seems to be a false positive.  That function calls
> sem_revalidate() which may or may not require a sem_unlock() afterwards,
> depending on what value it returned.
> 
> I'm not sure it's worth teaching the tool about this - I'd refer to
> strangle the IPC code.
> 

-
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/