From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 3 11:27:49 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E88DC76; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 11:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 549EA78F; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 11:27:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.100]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id NAA05901; Wed, 03 Dec 2014 13:29:39 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD)) id 1Xw85w-000PMT-SH; Wed, 03 Dec 2014 13:27:44 +0200 Message-ID: <547EF378.8090202@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 13:26:48 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer , Warner Losh Subject: Re: witness and modules. References: <54788FF3.3030602@freebsd.org> <2805430.yZtslRjaC7@ralph.baldwin.cx> <547D4947.4040203@freebsd.org> <547E766A.1070008@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <547E766A.1070008@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 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: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 11:27:49 -0000 On 03/12/2014 04:33, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 12/3/14, 12:24 AM, Warner Losh wrote: >>> On Dec 1, 2014, at 10:08 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: >>> >>> On 12/1/14, 11:39 PM, John Baldwin wrote: >>>> On Friday, November 28, 2014 11:08:35 PM Julian Elischer wrote: >>>>> Do we need to compile all modules with witness definitions when >>>>> linking with a kernel compiled with witness? >>>>> This was true at one stage but I remember some work was done to make >>>>> them compatible. >>>> You should not need this. modules always call functions in the kernel for >>>> lock operations and this functions are what invoke WITNESS. >>>> >>> that's what I thought but empirical evidence disagrees. >>> I'll try some more cases. >> I swap back and forth all the time between the two. Kernel modules don’t >> change when you compile them with WITNESS or without. > not entirely.. > hwpmc.ko: U witness_restore > hwpmc.ko: U witness_save > zfs.ko: U witness_restore > zfs.ko: U witness_save Seems like the problem affects modules that use DROP_GIANT / PICKUP_GIANT. -- Andriy Gapon