Re: alpha: futex regression bisected
From: Michael Cree
Date: Mon Feb 27 2012 - 01:48:26 EST
On 21/02/12 06:28, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 02/20/12 00:20, Michael Cree wrote:
>> I have noticed some user space problems (pulseaudio crashes in pthread
>> code, glibc/nptl test suite failures, java compiler freezes on SMP alpha
>> systems) that arise when using a 2.6.39 or later kernel on Alpha.
>> Bisecting between 2.6.38 and 2.6.39 (using glibc/nptl test suite as
>> criterion for good/bad kernel) eventually leads to:
>>
>> 8d7718aa082aaf30a0b4989e1f04858952f941bc is the first bad commit
>> commit 8d7718aa082aaf30a0b4989e1f04858952f941bc
>> Author: Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Thu Mar 10 18:50:58 2011 -0800
>>
>> futex: Sanitize futex ops argument types
>>
>> Change futex_atomic_op_inuser and futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic
>> prototypes to use u32 types for the futex as this is the data type the
>> futex core code uses all over the place.
>
>
> futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic(u32 *uval, u32 __user *uaddr,
> u32 oldval, u32 newval)
> ...
> : "r"(uaddr), "r"((long)oldval), "r"(newval)
>
>
> There is no 32-bit compare instruction. These are implemented by
> consistently extending the values to a 64-bit type. Since the
> load instruction sign-extends, we want to sign-extend the other
> quantity as well (despite the fact it's logically unsigned).
>
> So:
>
> - : "r"(uaddr), "r"((long)oldval), "r"(newval)
> + : "r"(uaddr), "r"((long)(int)oldval), "r"(newval)
>
> should do the trick.
Thanks, that fixes it. Will you formally submit a patch with commit
message or should I?
You can have at least a Reviewed-by, or even an
Acked-by: Phil Carmody <ext-phil.2.carmody@xxxxxxxxx>
who correctly analysed the problem in response to when I suggested the
fix on the debian-alpha email list without explanation.
Cheers
Michael.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-alpha" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html