From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 8 06:14:42 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80AE91065673; Tue, 8 May 2012 06:14:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pluknet@gmail.com) Received: from mail-yx0-f182.google.com (mail-yx0-f182.google.com [209.85.213.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13EAE8FC0C; Tue, 8 May 2012 06:14:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yenl8 with SMTP id l8so57102yen.13 for ; Mon, 07 May 2012 23:14:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=OM76sdjkUvwBcDB6zbPsAKuVrkth7vDsgQgpF1aawaU=; b=UmfWV7TMMy9A435cru2GkKBO0VVmgoHnCiwSchOpV4DVK1s0ZBYZ8063oEUyf1oXhy XKrugrDHBZk3MIZsZZAKUaY8ymXm4GqmBAwz9LxO/rSJNeyBVCAOJnY+G5zoQBjRG39g sFIz4XYMzKnmNcfTrDxnNGQXl9QAKO1dtQC/Vvc4eBPHgWxqH0O0jr40KZ6SmSVLITaV q9UbMMW23iZgsjcXyMSIYCKK9+pjO1ci39rxuQxT4DyZTvvjrwpVxzm4t+jDCgl1032Q u3zGCI42KZ89o+IkfYCEW2NasV+UU3OaOzl0a1r0rHtl9BFalZIQ/sPDHJcHdKWo3wQs p6LQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.141.131 with SMTP id o3mr9071513icu.1.1336457681305; Mon, 07 May 2012 23:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.8.170 with HTTP; Mon, 7 May 2012 23:14:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4FA8736B.1040300@FreeBSD.org> References: <4FA6F324.4080107@FreeBSD.org> <4FA82269.6080406@FreeBSD.org> <20120507201153.GA19942@dft-labs.eu> <4FA8736B.1040300@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 10:14:41 +0400 Message-ID: From: Sergey Kandaurov To: Doug Barton Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: mckusick@freebsd.org, Mateusz Guzik , freebsd-current Subject: Re: panic, seems related to r234386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 06:14:42 -0000 On 8 May 2012 05:14, Doug Barton wrote: > On 05/07/2012 13:11, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 12:28:41PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >>> On 05/06/2012 15:19, Sergey Kandaurov wrote: >>>> On 7 May 2012 01:54, Doug Barton wrote: >>>>> I got this with today's current, previous (working) kernel is r232719. >>>>> >>>>> panic: _mtx_lock_sleep: recursed on non-recursive mutex struct mount mtx >>>>> @ /frontier/svn/head/sys/kern/vfs_subr.c:4595 >>> >>> ... >>> >>>> Please try this patch. > > Ok, so far so good. Again, thanks for the quick response. I'm > stress-testing my ext2fs partitions a bit atm, and everything seems Ok. > I'll let you know if I run into any problems. > > So my next question is, does removing those locks present any risks? > Should they be replaced by different locks, or were they just safety > belts to start with? Unlike in the previously used macro MNT_VNODE_FOREACH_ABORT_ILOCKED(), the currently used macro MNT_VNODE_FOREACH_ALL_ABORT() manages mount mutexes itself so you don't need to mess with them. The locking is there, it's just hidden behind macros. > > Finally, should my next step be to advance to the latest current + your > patch and see how I go from there? Yep, so that patches will be tested before they go to head. -- wbr, pluknet