Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 2 Apr 2017 03:27:04 +0000 (UTC)
From:      Jin Guojun <jguojun@sbcglobal.net>
To:        FreeBSD Questions Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: 10.3 system hangs when existing from X with radeon cards/driver
Message-ID:  <1167907592.9096642.1491103624078@mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1367028502.7607768.1490997691827@mail.yahoo.com>
References:  <1367028502.7607768.1490997691827.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1367028502.7607768.1490997691827@mail.yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This seems not the Xorg server issue.Replaced xf86-video-ati (ati_drv.so, radeon_drv.so) from working 11.0 system, the problem persists.Then, replace xorg-server 1.17.x from 11.0 as well, existing X using radeon video cards still hangs the system.Not sure if this is caused by some dynamic libraries X uses.
 

    On Friday, March 31, 2017 3:01 PM, Jin Guojun <jguojun@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
 

 When using Radeon Video cards (X600/RV370, HD2400/RV610, HD4650/RV730) in FreeBSD 10.3, existing X causes system hanging.Event installed the xorg-7.7_2 with latest xf86-video-ati driver released on Feb 24, 2017, this problem still exists.
The xorg-7.7_2 in FreeBSD 11.0 and 12-Current do not have this problem.Has anyone seen this problem?And any suggestion on solving this problem on 10.3-R?
-Jin


   
From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org  Sun Apr  2 08:30:38 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 857E3D29BAF
 for <freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Sun,  2 Apr 2017 08:30:38 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from ablacktshirt@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-pg0-x234.google.com (mail-pg0-x234.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::234])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CFF0666
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Sun,  2 Apr 2017 08:30:38 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from ablacktshirt@gmail.com)
Received: by mail-pg0-x234.google.com with SMTP id g2so95400242pge.3
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Sun, 02 Apr 2017 01:30:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
 h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version
 :content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=BFoNGxwomHEdbNTkrQcXrlQlL/b8oD2/jKHFj5PXE3w=;
 b=uqNwI3FcVTEno1/TSPtcDQxEQZ8e4aafqXM0Nw3yPunyFoAtBGOiTapB1eR0NpN31u
 knbo1z3V6ZGKQWPcg0003B3DsUrrBVSBUR8oiTIp7aYOAg7VMzv2PQGjU35r6i2QUzex
 R8ukQmy/iCjcsSpWBPekEi91JPArRa0H8HwtrosP+LDThFl2vIgNlRCGW/8oUDDPxkp4
 CuNA+xO7et0LE0v9F/oRlnFfVXmNvnZ3Kbe9ubEK2hTMSuhgSxKy93pA+mXTX5mFPyTF
 /qhTdzaxu5bRypqcMzbq3v5JXlKAhSNx7cgiYeM0RznvhTLcVRnOlwE8GwrckYeODuMn
 5ijA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent
 :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=BFoNGxwomHEdbNTkrQcXrlQlL/b8oD2/jKHFj5PXE3w=;
 b=V6Vz7OrG1nfi6LOo5aJ1OsGsiDIgeNDpaqL60ViN/yl9HuqKZlMFcgipoIU5ZYnZ0F
 w6Eq7YcElZnQ5dfIFOCQLsPPWigegiSgn16lnigUAIS9stTwHTT92AT2ua8koJ5sDyb+
 4kWiudySZA5tQwxquaC1lXRepB/JICLsqjGjfu8aFX2fNUTXPuc+lPFiwjvlHuRr4tee
 bOg2Ili19Apy8r06C5GP0FD8ArqKyhfB6O/dELFrqiCx6ObJX+gG4tM4BFk0pxAwOImv
 x+egEs6FVnAp292GXWCv1japjczVTgFqIqOnbSVddC8yydUh6J8Fqytzr7R7uo2ceN0u
 9g7A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0hsMdUsCIrE0izEJxMl2MtdXMEmDA6A+txqM2lh/Y8xN47J+Iln1TsR0AwoBPj2Q==
X-Received: by 10.84.211.130 with SMTP id c2mr14077025pli.82.1491121837491;
 Sun, 02 Apr 2017 01:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.115] ([223.73.97.188])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h9sm19294550pfd.103.2017.04.02.01.30.32
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Sun, 02 Apr 2017 01:30:36 -0700 (PDT)
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
From: Yubin Ruan <ablacktshirt@gmail.com>
Subject: Understanding the FreeBSD locking mechanism
Message-ID: <e5b5f272-7515-05f8-ac6a-14c7bac4346c@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 00:30:22 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>;
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2017 08:30:38 -0000

Hi,
I am reading the FreeBSD source code related to its locking mechanism. I
have done some researches but still cannot understand some codes.

Let's take `spinlock' for example. I know there are different kinds of
mutex in FreeBSD: spin mutex and other kinds of mutex. I try to locate
the source of spin mutex but what I find all look very weird to me. For
example, the `spinlock_enter()`

 1816 void
 1817 spinlock_enter(void)
 1818 {
 1819         struct thread *td;
 1820         register_t flags;
 1821
 1822         td = curthread;
 1823         if (td->td_md.md_spinlock_count == 0) {
 1824                 flags = intr_disable();
 1825                 td->td_md.md_spinlock_count = 1;
 1826                 td->td_md.md_saved_flags = flags;
 1827         } else
 1828                 td->td_md.md_spinlock_count++;
 1829         critical_enter();
 1830 }

Does this function provides the ordinary "spinlock" functionality? There
is no special "test-and-set" instruction, and neither any extra locking
to protect internal data structure manipulation. Isn't this subjected to
race condition?

I also checked the `mtx_lock()`, but neither can't find a seemingly
correct implementation.

Do I miss anything? Which is the real implementation of the spin lock in
FreeBSD?

Thanks
Yubin Ruan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1167907592.9096642.1491103624078>