On 2011-01-18 10:47, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-01-17 21:15, Jeff Weber wrote:
>> I get a segfault when attempting to rt_mutex_acquire a mutex created in
>> kernel space. I've reduced the issue to the following sample code.
>> Help finding my mistake is appreciated.
>>
>> TIA,
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>> Kernel space Code:
>> #include <linux/module.h>
>> #include <linux/init.h>
>> #include <native/mutex.h>
>> #include "testAPI.h" /* defines MTXNAME */
>>
>> #define MODNAME "XenoTest"
>>
>> static RT_MUTEX sMtx;
>>
>> static int __init mymodule_init(void)
>> {
>> int status;
>>
>> status = rt_mutex_create(&sMtx, MTXNAME);
>> if (status) {
>> printk ("rt_mutex_create: %d\n", status);
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> printk ("loaded module %s\n", MODNAME);
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> static void __exit mymodule_exit(void)
>> {
>> rt_mutex_delete(&sMtx);
>>
>> printk ("unloaded module %s\n", MODNAME);
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> module_init(mymodule_init);
>> module_exit(mymodule_exit);
>>
>> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>>
>>
>>
>> User space Code:
>> #include <stdio.h>
>> #include <sys/mman.h>
>> #include <native/mutex.h>
>> #include <native/task.h>
>>
>> #include "testAPI.h" /* defines MTXNAME */
>>
>> #define PRIO 0
>> #define MODE 0
>>
>> int main(void)
>> {
>> RT_MUTEX mtx;
>> RT_TASK tsk;
>> RT_MUTEX_INFO info;
>> int status;
>>
>> mlockall(MCL_CURRENT|MCL_FUTURE);
>>
>> status = rt_task_shadow(&tsk, NULL, PRIO, MODE);
>> if (status) {
>> fprintf(stderr, "rt_task_shadow: %d\n", status);
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> status = rt_mutex_bind(&mtx, MTXNAME, TM_INFINITE);
>> if (status) {
>> fprintf(stderr, "rt_mutex_bind: %d\n", status);
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> status = rt_mutex_inquire(&mtx, &info);
>> if (status) {
>> fprintf(stderr, "rt_mutex_inquire: %d\n", status);
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> status = rt_mutex_acquire(&mtx, TM_INFINITE); /* SEGFAULT HERE! */
>> if (status) {
>> fprintf(stderr, "rt_mutex_acquire: %d\n", status);
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> status = rt_mutex_release(&mtx);
>> if (status) {
>> fprintf(stderr, "rt_mutex_release: %d\n", status);
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> printf("test success\n"); // back to primary mode
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> my kernel
>>
>> backtrace:
>> Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.
>> #0 0xb770077a in xnarch_atomic_cmpxchg (v=0xb777ac00, old=0, newval=21)
>> at ../../../src/include/asm/xenomai/atomic.h:95
>> 95 __asm__ __volatile__(LOCK_PREFIX "cmpxchgl %1,%2"
>> (gdb) bt full
>> #0 0xb770077a in xnarch_atomic_cmpxchg (v=0xb777ac00, old=0, newval=21)
>> at ../../../src/include/asm/xenomai/atomic.h:95
>> ptr = 0xb777ac00
>> prev = 4294967295
>> #1 0xb7700815 in xnsynch_fast_acquire (fastlock=0xb777ac00, new_ownerh=21)
>> at ../../../include/nucleus/synch.h:52
>> lock_state = 3077595124
>> #2 0xb7700c3a in rt_mutex_acquire_inner (mutex=0xbfecd690, timeout=0,
>> mode=XN_RELATIVE) at mutex.c:83
>> err = 134513420
>> cur = 21
>> #3 0xb7700e01 in rt_mutex_acquire (mutex=0xbfecd690, timeout=0) at
>> mutex.c:129
>> No locals.
>> #4 0x0804884a in main () at uspace.c:38
>> mtx = {opaque = 19, fastlock = 0xb777ac00, lockcnt = 0}
>> tsk = {opaque = 21, opaque2 = 3075921616}
>> info = {locked = 0, nwaiters = 0,
>> name = "TestMtx\000\000\000\060\000@\236i\340\000\177%", '\000'
>> <repeats 12 times>,
>> owner =
>> "\000\000\000\000\364\036\331\336\020\037\331\336\365Pd\340\005\005UU\000\037\331\336\000\000\000\000\023\000\000"}
>> status = 0
>>
>> my config:
>> arch: x86
>> linux: 2.6.35.10
>> xenomai: 2.5.5.2
>>
>> BTW: I did a checkout of git tag v2.5.5.2, and XENO_VERSION_STRING is
>> "2.5.5.1"
>>
>
> A) In-kernel use of the Xenomai skins is deprecated, and mixing user and
> kernel space use won't make it easier for you to overcome this in your
> system.
>
> B) If you actually depend on a shared mutex (I would really recommend to
> revalidate that need), you must create it in user space so that it gains
> a user space compatible fastlock.
Hmm, which just turned out to be impossible as rt_mutex_bind is only for
user space.
/me is now really unsure if we should fix it (beyond catching &
reporting the invalid setup). Designing applications like this points
out several potential technical and legal issues. Other opinions?
> Otherwise, the mutex will only be
> initialized for in-kernel use, and binding to it from user space will
> make the latter fail.
>
> I guess we should catch this case more gracefully as long as we support
> in-kernel mutexes...
>
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
