Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 3 Apr 1996 01:05:31 +1000
From:      Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
To:        bde@zeta.org.au, phk@critter.tfs.com
Cc:        freebsd-current@freefall.freebsd.org, kuku@gilberto.physik.rwth-aachen.de
Subject:   Re: calcru: negative time:
Message-ID:  <199604021505.BAA28807@godzilla.zeta.org.au>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> >Alternatively, could we make a check in spl*() so that if splhigh has been
>> >active >long< time we will print a warning ?
>> ...  The problem should
>> be reported by stopping at a breakpoint in spl0 or in doreti before the
>> cpl has been reduced.  Then there will be a chance of seeing what set
>> cpl high for too long.

>Couldn't you just record the %eip in splhigh() ?

Yes, unless the problem was more to do with the flow of control from
where splhigh was set to where it was cleared.  This would be hard to
see, but it might help to look at the stack frame.

You would also have to be careful about nested splhigh()s and nonlinear
flows of control (context switches).

I like breakpoints.  They're faster to write than printfs.

Bryce



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604021505.BAA28807>