From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 18 07:24:53 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BCBE16A4CE for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2004 07:24:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E2043D54 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2004 07:24:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from db@TruNet.dk) Received: from user4.cybercity.dk (user4.cybercity.dk [212.242.41.50]) by cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78F0418F9D5 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:24:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from main.trunet.dk (port132.ds1-arsy.adsl.cybercity.dk [212.242.239.73]) by user4.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 250CF1278D7 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:24:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:28:27 +0200 From: db To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Message-Id: <20040418162827.4d97f2d7@main.trunet.dk> In-Reply-To: <200404181050.i3IAoFS0024008@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <1082285383.0@main.trunet.dk> <200404181050.i3IAoFS0024008@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.10claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.2.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: kern/65702: Kernel panic on i386 5.2.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 14:24:53 -0000 Hi all I'm not a C programmer and I have not spend much time reading the kernel, but regarding my bug report I may have found the problem: 143 static void 144 propagate_priority(struct thread *td) 145 { 146 struct turnstile_chain *tc; 147 struct turnstile *ts; 148 struct thread *td1; 149 int pri; 150 151 mtx_assert(&sched_lock, MA_OWNED); 152 pri = td->td_priority; 153 ts = td->td_blocked; 154 for (;;) { 155 td = ts->ts_owner; 156 157 if (td == NULL) { 158 /* 159 * This really isn't quite right. Really 160 * ought to bump priority of thread that 161 * next acquires the lock. 162 */ 163 return; 164 } According to my first mail isn't td_blocked = 0x0? And wouldn't that make line 155 fail? br db