From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-76624-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 2787 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2017 21:58:30 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 2774 invoked by uid 89); 6 Jan 2017 21:58:29 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=owner's, locked, H*M:126, printers
X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Message-ID: <1483739904.5606.126.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11] Add pretty printers for the NPTL lock types
From: Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
To: Martin Galvan <omgalvan.86@gmail.com>
Cc: siddhesh@sourceware.org, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
        libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2017 21:58:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <CAN19L9E9FEjfmjaxiW-Mr4ueax-Raao+b_MJE6AMmWVN8T15eg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1612081855170.9769@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
	 <1481576088-15304-1-git-send-email-omgalvan.86@gmail.com>
	 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1612141820060.32751@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
	 <CAN19L9GLm7Ey5ni=yrTQ7KioW2qF8rEHinincs85iS_2JKPmRQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CAN19L9FAbzN96JMV=i=o5LNic6ctRGUnoxYqSe09NvB-ZaTJMQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <cb8ede5a-f9ce-9d3b-9fe9-b6708c1388eb@sourceware.org>
	 <CAN19L9FSEUW+1_0ziESsAd-Sr-Nd9gnk9jdTBPKiNnqmCQ2a8A@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1482424494.14990.810.camel@redhat.com>
	 <CAN19L9Feu-=SAiwuTxsb1HNM96RhbrttFG7Q3O_AH=X942jRag@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1482447010.14990.815.camel@redhat.com>
	 <CAN19L9GEmszxLiGmUAiMYbiTXjs92jZ=pE3v-3iLwygXRoRE8g@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1482512736.14990.831.camel@redhat.com>
	 <CAN19L9FYiW7Y4XFxY3uteaV=HYUOkhz6TihBxNyYF9fAfmNngQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1482518873.14990.832.camel@redhat.com>
	 <CAN19L9E9FEjfmjaxiW-Mr4ueax-Raao+b_MJE6AMmWVN8T15eg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2017-01/txt/msg00135.txt.bz2

On Fri, 2016-12-23 at 16:37 -0300, Martin Galvan wrote:
> 2016-12-23 15:47 GMT-03:00 Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>:
> >   Status = Locked, possibly with no waiters, Owner ID = 0, Robust = No,
> 
> That's odd, IIRC locked mutexes always record their owner's ID. I
> assume manually printing mutex->__data.__owner at that point shows 0
> too, right?

This may be related to lock elision.  In a build with lock elision
disabled, I didn't see the failure.  The next build with lock elision
enabled again showed the failure.

Did you test with or without lock elision?