From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org  Tue Nov 17 19:08:20 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D78D1A31B36
 for <freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:08:20 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C36B5190C
 for <freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:08:20 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118])
 by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id tAHJ8KWo012122
 for <freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:08:20 GMT
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 204633] If INVARIANTS is enabled, free() may attempt to acquire
 sleeping lock
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:08:21 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System
X-Bugzilla-Component: kern
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0-CURRENT
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People
X-Bugzilla-Who: jtl@freebsd.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: New
X-Bugzilla-Priority: ---
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-204633-8-vRJuzTsc7x@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-204633-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-204633-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bug reports <freebsd-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-bugs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:08:20 -0000

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204633

--- Comment #2 from Jonathan T. Looney <jtl@freebsd.org> ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #1)
> The assertion is failing because the thread holds a spin mutex or a critical section, 
> in which case it is not valid to try and acquire a sleep mutex. It could probably be 
> triggered in a non-INVARIANTS kernel too, since uma_zfree_arg() will attempt to 
> acquire the corresponding zone lock, which is also a sleep mutex.

Good point. That makes this very much look like intended behavior.

I only saw this when I tried testing my changes with an unusually high load.
Presumably, that caused the allocator to need to acquire the zone lock when it
would normally not need to do so. I wonder how many other things have slipped
through without enough testing to actually trigger the assert?

Perhaps, I should propose a man page change to make this more clear. And/or add
a check in malloc/free to catch these problems more reliably.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.