Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:20:38 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: lockmgr: thread <..> unlocking unheld lock
Message-ID:  <17232.8486.199356.888297@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
In-Reply-To: <200510141428.46595.jhb@freebsd.org>
References:  <17218.49812.271334.154595@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <200510131530.16376.jhb@freebsd.org> <17230.49819.985757.378764@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <200510141428.46595.jhb@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

John Baldwin writes:
 > On Thursday 13 October 2005 04:24 pm, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
 > > John Baldwin writes:
 > >  > On Wednesday 05 October 2005 02:00 pm, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
 > >  > > It also seems to have started happening on a second amd64 that I just
 > >  > > upgraded from a mid-august -current to CVS cvsupped yesterday.  This
 > >  > > is a UP amd64 3000+..
 > >  >
 > >  > Can you try reverting any of the recent changes to
 > >  > amd64/include/atomic.h? The ones to change foo_ptr() to take uintptr_t
 > >  > should be fine, but maybe try reverting the changes after that (not
 > >  > using +m for example).
 > >
 > > Inline asm is Greek to me, and I'd be no better than a monkey typing
 > > at making changes like that.
 > >
 > > Would you like me to just try reverting all of 1.38?
 > >
 > > Drew
 > 
 > Yes, that would work fine.

I just did a pair of buildworlds, and a portsnap fetch & update, and
got 11 of those messages.  So it looks like it wasn't your atomic
changes.

Drew



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17232.8486.199356.888297>