Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 1 Dec 2011 13:49:50 -0500
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Stop scheduler on panic
Message-ID:  <201112011349.50502.jhb@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <4ED7B25E.8070002@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <20111113083215.GV50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <201111211132.42119.jhb@freebsd.org> <4ED7B25E.8070002@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday, December 01, 2011 11:59:10 am Andriy Gapon wrote:
> 
> [cc list trimmed]
> 
> on 21/11/2011 18:32 John Baldwin said the following:
> > On Friday, November 18, 2011 4:59:32 pm Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >> on 17/11/2011 23:38 John Baldwin said the following:
> >>> On Thursday, November 17, 2011 4:35:07 pm John Baldwin wrote:
> >>>> Hmmm, you could also make critical_exit() not perform deferred preemptions
> >>>> if SCHEDULER_STOPPED?  That would fix the recursion and still let the
> >>>> preemption "work" when resuming from the debugger?
> 
> 
> Just to clarify, probably you are actually suggesting to not perform deferred
> preemptions if kdb_active == TRUE.  Because that's where we get the recursion (via
> kdb_switch).
> 
> I think that if we get into the mi_switch in a state where !kdb_active &&
> SCHEDULER_STOPPED(), then we probably should just - I don't know - panic again?
> 
> [the following is preserved for context]

Hmmm.  I'd be tempted to just ignore pending preemptions anytime
SCHEDULER_STOPPED() is true.  If it's stopped for a reason other than being
in the debugger (e.g. panic), I'd rather make a best effort at getting a dump
than panic again.

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201112011349.50502.jhb>