OK, so commit:
1d8fe7dc80 ("locking/mutexes: Unlock the mutex without the wait_lock")
generates this boot warning when CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES=y:
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 139 at /usr/src/linux-2.6/kernel/locking/mutex-debug.c:82 debug_mutex_unlock+0x155/0x180() DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lock->owner != current)
And that makes sense, because as soon as we release the lock a
new owner can come in...
One would think that !__mutex_slowpath_needs_to_unlock()
implementations suffer the same, but for DEBUG we fall back to
mutex-null.h which has an unconditional 1 for that.
The mutex debug code requires the mutex to be unlocked after
doing the debug checks, otherwise it can find inconsistent
state.
Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
When mutex debugging is enabled and an imbalanced mutex_unlock()
is called, we get the following, slightly confusing warning:
[ 364.208284] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lock->owner != current)
But in that case the warning is due to an imbalanced mutex_unlock() call,
and the lock->owner is NULL - so the message is misleading.
So improve the message by testing for this case specifically:
DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!lock->owner)
Signed-off-by: Liu, Chuansheng <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1386136693.3650.48.camel@cliu38-desktop-build
[ Improved the changelog, changed the patch to use !lock->owner consistently. ]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Peter Zijlstra