Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 8 Apr 2004 08:40:04 -0700
From:      Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: panic on one cpu leaves others running...
Message-ID:  <20040408154004.GA22500@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040408094211.39416B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <20040408064110.GA20875@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040408094211.39416B-100000@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 09:43:06AM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 12:13:39AM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
> > > 
> > > Funky, eh?  I thought we used to have code to ipi the other cpu's and halt
> > > them until the cpu in ddb was out agian.  I guess I mis-remember, or that
> > > code is broken...
> > 
> > You remember correctly.
> 
> And it's still going this morning:
*snip*
> Apr  8 13:39:30  sm-mta[4707]: i3879Tjc003922: SYSERR(root): cannot
> flock(/etc/mail/aliases, fd=5, type=1, omode=40000, euid=0): Operation not
> supported
> 
> Debugger(c07c3990) at Debugger+0x46
> db> 

Do you have SMP and/or made modifications to <machine/smptests.h>?
What's pcpu->pc_other_cpus and what is stopped_cpus currently?

> Presumably in large part because I'm in code that doesn't require Giant,
> so there are no lock conflicts.

I don't think that's the case. It think we're just not stopping the
CPUs or keep them stopped.

This is all a hunch and I have no way to test this myself...

-- 
 Marcel Moolenaar	  USPA: A-39004		 marcel@xcllnt.net



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040408154004.GA22500>