From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 30 22:38:52 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BAA616A412 for ; Sat, 30 Sep 2006 22:38:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from craig@feniz.gank.org) Received: from ion.gank.org (ion.gank.org [69.55.238.164]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7007143D49 for ; Sat, 30 Sep 2006 22:38:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from craig@feniz.gank.org) Received: by ion.gank.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id DF6F4111AD; Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:38:43 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:38:43 -0500 From: Craig Boston To: Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <20060930223843.GB32120@nowhere> References: <002201c6e290$45ece980$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> <451BD89F.8080203@samsco.org> <451C1F6D.2020302@mail.uni-mainz.de> <7.0.1.0.0.20060928152807.17bbe448@sentex.net> <451C271A.9040904@samsco.org> <20060930011904.GA62626@nowhere> <20060930013439.GB62626@nowhere> <20060930014242.GB42433@xor.obsecurity.org> <20060930060535.GA3467@riyal.ugcs.caltech.edu> <20060930183906.GA76658@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060930183906.GA76658@xor.obsecurity.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: Paul Allen , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CALL FOR TESTERS! [Re: 6.2 SHOWSTOPPER - em completely unusable on 6.2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 22:38:52 -0000 On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 02:39:06PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > Which is odd since the hypothesis Scott was working on should have > > > shown up clearly in the mutex trace, but did not. > > > > But it is consistent with there being a beat-frequency problem with > > respect to the scheduler. I think the number you really need is not > > how long giant was held but how long was spent waiting for it. > > It also seemed to show that nothing was really waiting for it (the > cnt_* entries). I can set up a serial console an poke around in DDB during my test case if anyone thinks some useful information can be found. Unfortunately I'm remote from the machine right now so I won't be able to do that until Monday :/ Craig