Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:54:14 -0400
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Stephan Uphoff <ups@tree.com>
Cc:        "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: scheduler (sched_4bsd) questions
Message-ID:  <200410111654.14502.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <1097437808.80398.4.camel@palm.tree.com>
References:  <1095468747.31297.241.camel@palm.tree.com> <20041005130308.GA2586@peter.osted.lan> <1097437808.80398.4.camel@palm.tree.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 10 October 2004 03:50 pm, Stephan Uphoff wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-10-05 at 09:03, Peter Holm wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 12:42:53PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> >
> > OK, I got a crash dump now, after a few modifications to kern_shutdown.c
> >
> > There are however a few strange things worth noticing:
> >
> > 1) The are no panic string:
> >
> > Mounted root from ufs:/dev/ad0s1a.
> > pid 1146: corrected slot count (2->1)
> > [thread 100796]
> > Stopped at      sched_add+0x13: movl    0x14c(%esi),%ebx
> >
> > 2) The gdb stack trace gets a bit weird at:
> >
> > #8  0xc07812da in calltrap () at ../../../i386/i386/exception.s:140
> > #9  0xc05f0018 in flock (td=0x0, uap=0x0) at
> > ../../../kern/kern_descrip.c:2138 #10 0xc0619fd1 in setrunqueue
> > (td=0xc2319180, flags=0x0) at kern_switch.c:521 #11 0xc061921f in
> > sched_wakeup (td=0xc2319180) at ../../../kern/sched_4bsd.c:859
> >
> > Where did flock() come from?
> >
> > The full console output is at http://www.holm.cc/stress/log/cons82.html
> >
> > - Peter
>
> I am still puzzled.
> My newest pet theory is that the sorting of the kg_runq is corrupted
> before setrunqueue is called.
> Directly changing td_priority while the thread is on the run queue would
> be an explanation.
> However the only instance that I found is what I think is a rare
> condition where sleepq_resume_thread may be called while the thread is
> on a runqueue. (John - what did I miss this time ...)

This is a good find!

> Peter could you try this patch?
>
> Index: subr_sleepqueue.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/src/sys/kern/subr_sleepqueue.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.11
> diff -u -r1.11 subr_sleepqueue.c
> --- subr_sleepqueue.c   19 Aug 2004 11:31:41 -0000      1.11
> +++ subr_sleepqueue.c   10 Oct 2004 18:18:55 -0000
> @@ -642,7 +642,7 @@
>         /* Adjust priority if requested. */
>         MPASS(pri == -1 || (pri >= PRI_MIN && pri <= PRI_MAX));
>         if (pri != -1 && td->td_priority > pri)
> -               td->td_priority = pri;
> +               sched_prio(td, pri);
>         setrunnable(td);
>         mtx_unlock_spin(&sched_lock);
> }
>
> Should it crash again could you walk the kg_runq to verify the sorting?
>
> Thanks
> 	Stephan

-- 
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?200410111654.14502.jhb>