Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:16:51 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com> To: ponds!lambert.org!terry, ponds!uunet.uu.net!ponds!ponds!rivers Cc: ponds!uunet.uu.net!ponds!Artisoft.COM!ponds!cet.co.jp!michaelh, ponds!uunet.uu.net!ponds!Artisoft.COM!ponds!FreeBSD.org!Hackers, ponds!uunet.uu.net!ponds!Artisoft.COM!ponds!lambert.org!terry, ponds!uunet.uu.net!ponds!Artisoft.COM!ponds!rivers, ponds!uunet.uu.net!ponds!Artisoft.COM!ponds!root.com!dg, ponds!uunet.uu.net!ponds!lambert.org!terry Subject: Re: Even more info on daily panics... Message-ID: <199611160116.UAA23035@lakes.water.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > If you look at the BSD4.4-Lite2 code, you will see they cleaned this > > > up (using a fix just as kludgy as my one liner) by using kern_lock.c > > > functions instead of smearing the lock state. > > > > Err, umm, I had to be a naysayer - but I've gotten two examples > > of the one-liner fix that didn't address my particular problem. > > > > Granted, I could have messed something up; I'd be happy to retry > > it all... > > You said it was fixed. > > Then you put in the printf, but removed the unlock, and it (understandably) > blew up. > Can you point me to the code I removed in 2.1.5-STABLE? I don't see anything missing when I diff my changes and the original source. - Dave R. -
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611160116.UAA23035>