Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 11:38:57 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> Subject: Re: panic on one cpu leaves others running... Message-ID: <200404121138.57950.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20040408185949.GA22954@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <20040408154004.GA22500@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040408114813.47476A-100000@fledge.watson.org> <20040408185949.GA22954@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 08 April 2004 02:59 pm, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 11:51:24AM -0400, Robert Watson wrote: > > > > Presumably in large part because I'm in code that doesn't require > > > > Giant, so there are no lock conflicts. > > > > > > I don't think that's the case. It think we're just not stopping the > > > CPUs or keep them stopped. > > > > I agree with that interpretation -- I was suggesting that the reason this > > problem might not be noticed is that a lot of our code paths require > > Giant, and it's only when you panic in code without Giant that > > Ah, ok. The thing that strikes me as odd, if not wrong, is that we > use PCPU(CPUID) to update the stopped_cpus mask, while we should be > using PCPU(CPUMASK) for that. See attached patch (untested). > > Am I off-base here? Yes. btsl takes a bit number, not a bitmask. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200404121138.57950.jhb>