From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 13 18:20:13 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-threads@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1495416A420 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:20:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8D2143D6D for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:20:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k1DIK92S005153 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:20:09 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k1DIK9Yn005152; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:20:09 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:20:09 GMT Message-Id: <200602131820.k1DIK9Yn005152@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.org From: John Baldwin Cc: Subject: Re: threads/89262: [kernel] [patch] multi-threaded process hangs in kernel in fork() X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: John Baldwin List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:20:13 -0000 The following reply was made to PR threads/89262; it has been noted by GNATS. From: John Baldwin To: David Xu Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org, garry@networkphysics.com Subject: Re: threads/89262: [kernel] [patch] multi-threaded process hangs in kernel in fork() Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 13:02:42 -0500 On Monday 13 February 2006 04:11, David Xu wrote: > ast will call userret which in turn will call thread_suspend_check. > so the bug may not be here, but in other code. > > I have found a race between sleep queue and thread suspension code, > the following patch fixed the bug, it also simplified interaction > between sleep queue and signal code. now, sleepq_abort() is also > fixed, it can save an errno, unlike current code, it wrongly works > as wakeup(). > > http://people.freebsd.org/~davidxu/patch/slpq_susp4.patch > > David Xu Only thing I would prefer is that you keep sleepq_catch_signals() but make it an internal function that sleepq_waitsig() and sleepq_timed_waitsig() call before sleepq_switch() so that sleepq_switch() doesn't get so long. Also, it would be good. Also, in sleepq_switch() you are using sleepq_release() and sleepq_lock() even though you already have a sleepqueue_chain pointer, and you do mtx operations on sc->sc_lock explicitly in some other places. It would be best to consistently just do mutex ops on sc->sc_lock instead of redoing the hash-lookup several times. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org