Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2005 18:10:36 +0200 From: Emanuel Strobl <Emanuel.strobl@gmx.net> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>, Munehiro Matsuda <haro@h4.dion.ne.jp> Subject: Re: LOR with iwi and UMA on 7-current Message-ID: <200509041810.44390@harrymail> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.53.0509041548010.93099@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <20050901.225149.41626079.haro@h4.dion.ne.jp> <Pine.BSF.4.53.0509041548010.93099@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] Am Sonntag, 4. September 2005 17:52 CEST schrieb Bjoern A. Zeeb: [...] > added this LOR with ID 150: > http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/lor.html#150 > > > lock order reversal > > 1st 0xc07a7060 ifnet (ifnet) @ net/if.c:1159 > > 2nd 0xc1f36b68 iwi0 (network driver) @ > > /home/haro/tmp/sys-7/modules/iwi/../../dev/iwi/if_iwi.c:1643 > > added with LOR ID 151: > http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/lor.html#151 > > > lock order reversal > > 1st 0xc22c2bb8 rtentry (rtentry) @ net/route.c:1269 > > 2nd 0xc1f36b68 iwi0 (network driver) @ > > /home/haro/tmp/sys-7/modules/iwi/../../dev/iwi/if_iwi.c:1587 > > added with LOR ID 152: > http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/lor.html#152 > > > lock order reversal > > 1st 0xc230a1f8 inp (tcpinp) @ netinet/tcp_usrreq.c:368 > > 2nd 0xc1f36b68 iwi0 (network driver) @ > > /home/haro/tmp/sys-7/modules/iwi/../../dev/iwi/if_iwi.c:1587 > > added with LOR ID 153: > http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/lor.html#153 > > though quite similar to LOR ID 128: > http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/lor.html#128 > > > lock order reversal > > 1st 0xc07a8a6c tcp (tcp) @ netinet/tcp_input.c:615 > > 2nd 0xc1f36b68 iwi0 (network driver) @ > > /home/haro/tmp/sys-7/modules/iwi/../../dev/iwi/if_iwi.c:1587 > > added with LOR ID 154: > http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/lor.html#154 Hello, are LockOrderReversal something to worry about? I ask because I see the list growing but it doesn't seem it's anything relevant for the Release process, so I guess they can be ignored by non kernel devolpers. Is this correct? If not, and LORs are serious errors, will 6.0 be shipped with all these errors?!? Well those from this message were on 7.0, but I guess the first hundred are in 6.0... Best regards, -Harry [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD4DBQBDGxyEBylq0S4AzzwRAn/uAJiS/opXNJiVrDWlmU/t8BMjQRgiAKCC7K6W X9Fj2alkuslpzp03PeHOPg== =V3ls -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200509041810.44390>