From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep 15 23:18:48 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4679516A41F;
	Thu, 15 Sep 2005 23:18:48 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from gw.catspoiler.org (217-ip-163.nccn.net [209.79.217.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5805A43D45;
	Thu, 15 Sep 2005 23:18:46 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from FreeBSD.org (mousie.catspoiler.org [192.168.101.2])
	by gw.catspoiler.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j8FNIYrR058745;
	Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:18:39 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org)
Message-Id: <200509152318.j8FNIYrR058745@gw.catspoiler.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:18:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org>
To: jhb@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <200509151456.50584.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, rwatson@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Witness patch
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 23:18:48 -0000

On 15 Sep, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday 02 September 2005 05:37 pm, Don Lewis wrote:
>> On  2 Sep, John Baldwin wrote:
>> > On Thursday 01 September 2005 11:52 pm, Don Lewis wrote:

>> >> I think it would make sense to print different messages for the
>> >> different trigger conditions.
>> >
>> > Hmm, I guess I view them as all just being reversals, and that we have
>> > some implicit orders that go something like this:
>> >
>> > sleepable locks --> Giant --> non-sleepable locks --> spin locks
>>
>> Attempting to lock one one of the other lock types while holding a spin
>> lock already prints a unique message and results in a panic. Identifying
>> the other cases of incorrect lock type ordering with a unique warning
>> message eliminates the need to grovel through the source code just to
>> find the types of the locks, and it indicates that looking at the output
>> of "show witness" is not needed.
> 
> Ok.  I'll still list the reversal (so you know which locks are involved) but 
> will tailor the first line to include the implicit rule in parens if the 
> reversal is the result of an implicit rule.

Sounds perfect to me.