Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 10:39:27 +0100 From: Stefan Ehmann <shoesoft@gmx.net> To: Stefan Ehmann <shoesoft@gmx.net> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: panic on 5.2 BETA: blockable sleep lock Message-ID: <1070012366.871.1.camel@shoeserv.freebsd> In-Reply-To: <1070011860.777.5.camel@shoeserv.freebsd> References: <200311280002.hAS029eF016292@gw.catspoiler.org> <1070011860.777.5.camel@shoeserv.freebsd>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 10:31, Stefan Ehmann wrote: > On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 01:02, Don Lewis wrote: > > On 27 Nov, Stefan Ehmann wrote: > > > On Wed, 2003-11-26 at 08:33, Don Lewis wrote: > > >> The problem is that selrecord() wants to lock a MTX_DEF mutex, which can > > >> cause a context switch if the mutex is already locked by another thread. > > >> This is contrary to what bktr_poll() wants to accomplish by calling > > >> critical_enter(). > > > > > > Strange enough that does not seem to happen with a kernel built without > > > INVARIANTS and WITNESS. Does this make any sense or is this just by > > > chance? > > > > You might try the patch below with WITNESS enabled. I don't have the > > hardware, so I can't test it. It compiles for me, but for all I know it > > could delete all your files if you run it. > > Unfortunately, after running the patched kernel some time I got a > slightly different panic: Please ignore the message above - this was the panic from an unpatched kernel - I was debugging the wrong core. Thanks again for quick help.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1070012366.871.1.camel>