From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 7 06:32:52 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE5F96B2; Sat, 7 Sep 2013 06:32:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mavbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ee0-x22c.google.com (mail-ee0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B15D2DED; Sat, 7 Sep 2013 06:32:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ee0-f44.google.com with SMTP id b47so2030518eek.3 for ; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 23:32:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ilD9VCbquphj1dYzFxmCe9bvhxnFO5x39Z+sK2ZQYyc=; b=QG21UhYVc6fS3I1DtG2lispuOFkJAHmGsBe8l2vshkVr1YO4aWaD22pXiPLM0kCxZ7 8ANziza/TDXJyqWx1/AxUCzeGzvLcl//C04L0EdjqhbUE6MyOUjeCEQa56mFfYcVFGc+ hl/mUU1NklX3q0vTmgPv0FRd14FTrHEeDNSU0gjqkWUFPbIOJ8fzIMO3ya6DnJspUMXA mGEgOm3UEsx300oUisAtYb5kK3Xq+xHC5yOcupeulRa62VM+h/bJVYhOHjFnuXYpjYO4 lWHlGSXs3iftT5iIQEduNFp4xMDOn+FoV6ShN31B/CJoo6bP2z+WyUGGctmThFYA0+aL Wfag== X-Received: by 10.14.8.72 with SMTP id 48mr10508882eeq.25.1378535568549; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 23:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mavbook.mavhome.dp.ua ([37.229.21.195]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id r48sm2188473eev.14.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 06 Sep 2013 23:32:47 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Alexander Motin Message-ID: <522AC88D.4070005@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 09:32:45 +0300 From: Alexander Motin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130616 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" , freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC][CFT] GEOM direct dispatch and fine-grained CAM locking References: <5224511D.4090503@FreeBSD.org> <20130903134251.GB43281@caravan.chchile.org> <5226DAB0.1060303@FreeBSD.org> <5228F9D4.3060008@FreeBSD.org> <20130906080627.GH43281@caravan.chchile.org> <52299257.10704@FreeBSD.org> <20130906230236.GI43281@caravan.chchile.org> In-Reply-To: <20130906230236.GI43281@caravan.chchile.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 06:32:52 -0000 On 07.09.2013 02:02, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 11:29:11AM +0300, Alexander Motin wrote: >> On 06.09.2013 11:06, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 12:46:27AM +0200, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote: >>>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Alexander Motin wrote: >>>>> I've found and fixed possible double request completion, that could cause >>>>> such symptoms if happened. Updated patch located as usual: >>>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~mav/camlock_patches/camlock_20130905.patch >>>>> >>> With this new one I cannot boot any more (I also updated the source >>> tree). This is a hand transcripted version: >>> >>> Trying to mount root from zfs:zroot/root []... >>> panic: Batch flag already set >>> cpuid = 1 >>> KDB: stack backtrace: >>> db_trace_self_wrapper() >>> kdb_backtrace() >>> vpanic() >>> kassert_panic() >>> xpt_batch_start() >>> ata_interrupt() >>> softclock_call_cc() >>> softclock() >>> ithread_loop() >>> fork_exit() >>> fork_trampoline() >> >> Thank you for the report. I see my fault. It is probably specific to >> ata(4) driver only. I've workarounded that in new patch version, but >> probably that area needs some rethinking. >> >> http://people.freebsd.org/~mav/camlock_patches/camlock_20130906.patch > > I'm not sure you needed a confirmation, but it boots. Thanks :). > > I didn't quite understand the thread; is direct dispatch enabled for > amd64? ISTR you said only i386 but someone else posted the macro for > amd64. Yes, it is enabled for amd64. I've said x86, meaning both i386 and amd64. -- Alexander Motin