Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:00:14 -0800 (PST) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: julian@FreeBSD.ORG, smp@FreeBSD.ORG, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: NETGRAPH broken with witness Message-ID: <XFMail.010223110014.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <3A963FB5.995FEA7D@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 23-Feb-01 Julian Elischer wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: >> >> On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 01:57:36AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: >> > Kris Kennaway wrote: >> > > >> > > Apparently this was never tested: early in the boot phase I get the >> > > following panic: >> > > >> > > panic: spin lock netgraph worklist mutex not in order list >> > > >> > > and indeed the witness code appears to have no knowledge of the >> > > netgraph spinlocks. >> > >> > so how is it supposed to know? >> >> From what I can gather, you add the locking hierarchy to be enforced >> to spin_order_list in kern.mutex.c > > hmm tricky.. I thought initiating the damned thing would insert it. For sleep mutexes it is automatic, yes. Spin mutexes are intended to only be used in very low level code and thus only in places where the order can be easily laid out. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.Baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.010223110014.jhb>