Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 09 Sep 2004 16:05:38 -0700
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To:        Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Unkillable KSE threaded proc
Message-ID:  <4140E1C2.3020704@elischer.org>
In-Reply-To: <16704.49447.290897.602540@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
References:  <16703.11479.679335.588170@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <16703.12410.319869.29996@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <413F55B8.50003@elischer.org> <16703.28031.454342.774229@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <413F8DBB.5040502@elischer.org> <16704.40876.708925.425911@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <4140AA2A.90605@elischer.org> <16704.45327.42494.922427@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <4140C04D.1060906@elischer.org> <16704.49447.290897.602540@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


Andrew Gallatin wrote:

>Julian Elischer writes:
> > >
> > >Maybe this would be easier to debug if I disabled preemption?
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > I think that this would possibly GO AWAY of you disab;ed preemption. 
> > which would make it very hard to debug :-)
> > 
>
>Yes and no.  You initially asked me to try in -current because of
>some changes you'd made to the exit code.  RELENG_5 (with the old
>exit code and no preemption) shows a different problem (proc is
>just not killable).    If the proc was killable without preemption,
>that would at least show your new code is better..
>

yeah, well I have this on my radar it's #4 on my to do list :-)

>
>Drew
>  
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4140E1C2.3020704>