X-Git-Url: https://pintos-os.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=blobdiff_plain;f=doc%2Fthreads.texi;h=40565994f536bbbec06e7a9beb25ae494cd4a60a;hb=3ddaa7092a49f2164cc41c77b142132216e8a5fe;hp=314ee61ca865aef58c4cb51cc4260eea8a965001;hpb=47009e4e26e13451ef152a57f95ad335ea261f87;p=pintos-anon

diff --git a/doc/threads.texi b/doc/threads.texi
index 314ee61..4056599 100644
--- a/doc/threads.texi
+++ b/doc/threads.texi
@@ -591,6 +591,34 @@ to cause many of the tests to fail.
 @item How do I run the tests?
 
 @xref{Testing}.
+
+@item Why do I get a test failure in @func{pass}?
+
+@anchor{The pass function fails}
+You are probably looking at a backtrace that looks something like this:
+
+@example
+0xc0108810: debug_panic (../../lib/kernel/debug.c:32)
+0xc010a99f: pass (../../tests/threads/tests.c:93)
+0xc010bdd3: test_mlfqs_load_1 (../../tests/threads/mlfqs-load-1.c:33)
+0xc010a8cf: run_test (../../tests/threads/tests.c:51)
+0xc0100452: run_task (../../threads/init.c:283)
+0xc0100536: run_actions (../../threads/init.c:333)
+0xc01000bb: main (../../threads/init.c:137)
+@end example
+
+This is just confusing output from the @command{backtrace} program.  It
+does not actually mean that @func{pass} called @func{debug_panic}.  In
+fact, @func{fail} called @func{debug_panic} (via the @func{PANIC}
+macro).  GCC knows that @func{debug_panic} does not return, because it
+is declared @code{NO_RETURN} (@pxref{Function and Parameter
+Attributes}), so it doesn't include any code in @func{pass} to take
+control when @func{debug_panic} returns.  This means that the return
+address on the stack looks like it is at the beginning of the function
+that happens to follow @func{fail} in memory, which in this case happens
+to be @func{pass}.
+
+@xref{Backtraces}, for more information.
 @end table
 
 @menu
@@ -689,4 +717,12 @@ just before the first @func{printf} in @func{main}.  Then modify
 
 It doesn't have to.  We won't test priority donation and the advanced
 scheduler at the same time.
+
+@item Can I use one queue instead of 64 queues?
+
+Yes, that's fine.  It's easiest to describe the algorithm in terms of 64
+separate queues, but that doesn't mean you have to implement it that
+way.
+
+If you use a single queue, it should probably be sorted.
 @end table