From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 1 21:04:50 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7853B16A4CE; Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:04:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tuminfo2.informatik.tu-muenchen.de (tuminfo2.informatik.tu-muenchen.de [131.159.0.81]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBCAB43D2D; Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:04:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from langd@informatik.tu-muenchen.de) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 23:03:17 +0200 From: Daniel Lang To: John Baldwin Message-ID: <20040701210317.GA86225@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> References: <20040628202434.GA73213@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> <20040629170014.GC1144@green.homeunix.org> <20040629183557.GA77135@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> <200406291453.34291.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040701153221.GC84986@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040701153221.GC84986@atrbg11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> X-Geek: GCS/CC d-- s: a- C++$ UBS++++$ P+++$ L- E-(---) W+++(--) N++ o K w--- O? M? V? PS+(++) PE--(+) Y+ PGP+ t++ 5+++ X R+(-) tv+ b+ DI++ D++ G++ e+++ h---(-) r+++ y+ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at informatik.tu-muenchen.de cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org cc: Colin Percival Subject: Re: kern/68442: panic - acquiring duplicate lock of same type: "sleepq chain" X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 21:04:50 -0000 Hi again, Daniel Lang wrote on Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 05:32:21PM +0200: [..] > However, the panic is obviously triggered inside the witness > code, because *lock_list = 0x0 in line 749. Although a few lines > above, the list is checked for beeing empty (line 707), just > Colin has already pointed out from the first trace I could > get. But between line 707 and 749 there is no obvious modification > to this list. I am not sure what 'find_instance()' does? > So maybe another thread on another CPU has modified the locklist > meanwhile? Is this possible? [..] I just removed WITNESS from the kernel and see what happens. If this is some strange corruption it may show somewhere else if WITNESS is removed. Maybe this could be more obvious then. If it doesn't crash any more, this could mean WITNESS code itself is broken. Btw, the addition of WITNESS is indeed something that has changed since all the trouble started. When the machine was still running in a stable fashion I did not have WITNESS enabled. I did it, when I put in more memory and built a PAE kernel and left it in since. Cheers, Daniel -- IRCnet: Mr-Spock - All your .sigs are belong to us - Daniel Lang * dl@leo.org * +49 89 289 18532 * http://www.leo.org/~dl/