From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 24 16:17:37 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEAB116A4CF; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:17:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B31A743D41; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:17:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kan@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (kan@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i7OGHb02026528; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:17:37 GMT (envelope-from kan@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from kan@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i7OGHbaU026527; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:17:37 GMT (envelope-from kan) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:17:37 +0000 From: Alexander Kabaev To: Tim Robbins Message-ID: <20040824161737.GA26508@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <20040824142129.S96700@cvs.imp.ch> <20040824124516.GA25734@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20040824144832.S96700@cvs.imp.ch> <20040824125818.GA25828@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20040824133420.GI77326@green.homeunix.org> <20040824140510.GA26058@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040824140510.GA26058@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: Martin Blapp cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: panic: getnewbuf: locked buf X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:17:37 -0000 On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 12:05:10AM +1000, Tim Robbins wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 09:34:20AM -0400, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:58:18PM +1000, Tim Robbins wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 02:48:57PM +0200, Martin Blapp wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > This has already been fixed in -CURRENT and will presumably be merged into > > > > > RELENG_5 in the next day or two. > > > > > > > > Can you point me to the responsable commit ? > > > > > > kern_lock.c 1.75 > > > > Releasing 5.3 with lockmgr(9) known-broken in one way versus the other > > really is no better. > > I suppose it would have been more accurate to say that it had been worked > around, not fixed, in -CURRENT. This is definitely something that needs to > be properly addressed before the release. > > > Tim The fix was under test by two people who were able to reproduce the error at will. So far I got one positive response and I am waiting for another before doing a commit. -- Alexander Kabaev