From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932078AbbJPKgI (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 16 Oct 2015 06:36:08 -0400
Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:36827 "EHLO
	Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752860AbbJPKgH (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 16 Oct 2015 06:36:07 -0400
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:35:23 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
cc: Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: futex timeout not working? (bisected)
In-Reply-To: <20151016103123.GE4684@osiris>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1510161234340.3960@nanos>
References: <20151015104347.GA4166@osiris> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1510161218400.3960@nanos> <20151016103123.GE4684@osiris>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0
X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: -
X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required,  ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 16 Oct 2015, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:21:51PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Heiko,
> > 
> > On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > >   /* We wait for half a second.  */
> > >   ts.tv_nsec += 500000000;
> > >   if (ts.tv_nsec >= 1000000000)
> > >     {
> > >       ++ts.tv_sec;
> > >       ts.tv_nsec -= 1000000000;
> > >     }
> > > 
> > >   ret = syscall (__NR_futex, &futex_word, op, expected, ts, NULL, FUTEX_BITSET_MATCH_ANY);
> > 
> > If you actually hand in a pointer to 'ts' then the program works as
> > expected even with the commit in question applied.
> 
> Yes, sorry about that! I was just about to write that this should have
> been &ts on x86. Since x86 seems to pass also structures >8 bytes by
> value.
> 
> However on s390 it is passed by reference. So even it I change ts to &ts,
> it will hang as I described.
> 
> So you are saying this works on x86 and it must be some s390 specific bug?

Looks like. I have no idea why that would break on s390. Did you try
to revert the commit on top of tree?

Thanks,

	tglx