From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 9 23:05:42 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2612C16A50E; Thu, 9 Sep 2004 23:05:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.vicor-nb.com (bigwoop.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25AC443D1F; Thu, 9 Sep 2004 23:05:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from elischer.org (julian.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.97]) by mail.vicor-nb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2987A3D2; Thu, 9 Sep 2004 16:05:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4140E1C2.3020704@elischer.org> Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 16:05:38 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030516 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Gallatin 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> In-Reply-To: <16704.49447.290897.602540@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: John Baldwin cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unkillable KSE threaded proc X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 23:05:42 -0000 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 > >