Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:50:45 +0100 From: Florian Smeets <flo@smeets.im> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Jun Kuriyama <kuriyama@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r199067 - in head/sys: amd64/amd64 i386/i386 Message-ID: <4AFC5905.70101@smeets.im> In-Reply-To: <20091112145506.GH2331@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <7meio5g4yx.wl%kuriyama@s2factory.co.jp> <20091111215651.GM64905@hoeg.nl> <20091111223340.GF2331@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20091112145506.GH2331@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/12/09 3:55 PM, Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:33:40AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:56:51PM +0100, Ed Schouten wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> * Jun Kuriyama<kuriyama@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >>>> Can you test with these patches? Testing on only one of both system >>>> is enough. "patch-1" forces disabling CLFLUSH feature even if SS bit >>>> exists. "patch-2" forces no CLFLUSH tweak. I'd like to know with >>>> which patch your system can live. >>> >>> For some reason they both seem to boot. Yikes. I've done some more >>> testing and it seems the old version even hangs if I add some additional >>> printf's above and below, which makes me believe the problem is a bit >>> more complex than we realize... >> >> The only thing I see now is that TUNABLE_INT declaration is not needed, >> since SYSINIT is started after hammer_time(), so TUNABLE_FETCH is >> processed after everything is done for BSP. >> >> Wait, are your machines SMP ? Hmm, could you, please, remove TUNABLE_INT() >> and see how it ends up ? > > [Selecting random email in the thread]. > > Luckily, my co-worker has laptop that runs HEAD and exhibited the > problem. Patch below fixed the hang for him. Will be happy to get > confirmation that patch fixes the hung for other people who reported it. > > http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/misc/initcache.1.patch > > Issue is that TUNABLE_INT_FETCH was called on AP while CPU was not > initialized properly, in particular, curthread was not set etc. But, > kernel environment is already switched to dynamic, so access needs to > lock a mutex. > > I am currently looking at i386, that probably needs similar change. > r199229 + your patch boots again. Thank you very much! Cheers, Florian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4AFC5905.70101>