hen it wouldn't work on a 386.
*/
-int __down_trylock(struct semaphore *sem)
+asmregparm int __down_trylock(struct semaphore *sem)
{
int sleepers;
unsigned long flags;
Jiaying
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Jiaying Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 05:06:49PM +0800, Jiaying Zhang wrote:
> > The 2.6.24 kernels are OK, but I have seen this problem with all of the
> > 2.6.25 kernels I have tried. There have been a lot of chang
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 1:02 AM, Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:25:29AM +0800, Jiaying Zhang wrote:
> > Do you have any thought about what the problem might be?
> > Thanks a lot!
>
> Yeah, my first thought is that your code is buggy
Hi Jeff,
Do you have any thought about what the problem might be?
Thanks a lot!
Jiaying
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Jiaying Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The stack trace isn't very helpful. Here it is.
>
> EIP: 0073:[] CPU: 0 Not tainted ESP: 007b:0be3ea78 EFLAGS:
+0x2e/0x3e
08323cec: [<080654dd>] handle_signal+0x4d/0x7a
08323d0c: [<08066ebf>] hard_handler+0xf/0x14
08323d1c: [] 0xb7fff420
Segmentation fault
Jiaying
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 12:53:46AM -0700, Jiaying Zhang wr
Hello,
I found since 2.6.25 kernels, uml crashes when it calls down() on a
semaphore with
zero counter. Here is some example code.
static struct semaphore test_sem;
static int testfunc(NULL)
{
interruptible_sleep_on_timeout(&sleep_queue, 5 * HZ); // after some
short period
up(&tes
