In message: Re: [linux-yocto][v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/sdkv5.10/axxia][PATCH]
fix rtmutex build error
on 27/10/2024 Wang, Jinfeng (CN) wrote:
> Hi Burce,
>
> this patch is needed in all the preempt-rt branch, could you please merge
> them all:
>
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/base
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/bcm-2xxx-rpi
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/cn-sdkv4.18/cn96xx
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/cn-sdkv5.4/octeon
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/intel-sdk-5.10/intel-socfpga
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/nxp-sdk-5.10/nxp-s32g2xx
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/nxp-sdk-5.10/nxp-soc
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/sdkv5.10/xlnx-soc
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/ti-sdk-5.10/ti-j72xx
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/x86
>
> v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/sdkv5.10/axxia ----this is already described
> in the title.
merged.
Bruce
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jinfeng
>
> On 10/25/2024 3:22 PM, Wang, Jinfeng (CN) via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
> > From: Jinfeng Wang <jinfeng.wang...@windriver.com>
> >
> > Fix the following error:
> > rtmutex.c:1608:9: error: implicit declaration of function
> > 'rt_mutex_print_deadlock';
> > did you mean 'rt_mutex_handle_deadlock'?
> >
> > rtmutex.c:1739:63: error: passing argument 3 of
> > 'rt_mutex_handle_deadlock' from
> > incompatible pointer type [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jinfeng Wang <jinfeng.wang...@windriver.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 38 ++++----------------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
> > index 875381d72255..bec7e07a80dc 100644
> > --- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
> > +++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
> > @@ -1602,10 +1602,7 @@ static void rt_mutex_handle_deadlock(int res, int
> > detect_deadlock,
> > return;
> > raw_spin_unlock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
> > - /*
> > - * Yell lowdly and stop the task right here.
> > - */
> > - rt_mutex_print_deadlock(w);
> > +
> > while (1) {
> > set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > schedule();
> > @@ -1736,7 +1733,7 @@ int __sched rt_mutex_slowlock_locked(struct rt_mutex
> > *lock, int state,
> > remove_waiter(lock, waiter);
> > /* ww_mutex wants to report EDEADLK/EALREADY, let it */
> > if (!ww_ctx)
> > - rt_mutex_handle_deadlock(ret, chwalk, waiter);
> > + rt_mutex_handle_deadlock(ret, chwalk, lock, waiter);
> > } else if (ww_ctx) {
> > ww_mutex_account_lock(lock, ww_ctx);
> > }
> > @@ -1774,35 +1771,8 @@ rt_mutex_slowlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
> > */
> > raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
> > - /* Try to acquire the lock again: */
> > - if (try_to_take_rt_mutex(lock, current, NULL)) {
> > - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
> > - return 0;
> > - }
> > -
> > - set_current_state(state);
> > -
> > - /* Setup the timer, when timeout != NULL */
> > - if (unlikely(timeout))
> > - hrtimer_start_expires(&timeout->timer, HRTIMER_MODE_ABS);
> > -
> > - ret = task_blocks_on_rt_mutex(lock, &waiter, current, chwalk);
> > -
> > - if (likely(!ret))
> > - /* sleep on the mutex */
> > - ret = __rt_mutex_slowlock(lock, state, timeout, &waiter);
> > -
> > - if (unlikely(ret)) {
> > - __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> > - remove_waiter(lock, &waiter);
> > - rt_mutex_handle_deadlock(ret, chwalk, lock, &waiter);
> > - }
> > -
> > - /*
> > - * try_to_take_rt_mutex() sets the waiter bit
> > - * unconditionally. We might have to fix that up.
> > - */
> > - fixup_rt_mutex_waiters(lock);
> > + ret = rt_mutex_slowlock_locked(lock, state, timeout, chwalk, ww_ctx,
> > + &waiter);
> > raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
> >
> >
> >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#14520):
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/linux-yocto/message/14520
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/109204300/21656
Group Owner: linux-yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/linux-yocto/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
