Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 18:58:04 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net>, alpha@FreeBSD.ORG, alc@FreeBSD.ORG, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: alpha: top of tree kernel blooie Message-ID: <15817.44172.809351.382956@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211061553110.90126-100000@beppo> References: <20021106182932.J1374-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211061553110.90126-100000@beppo>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Jacob writes: > > > > Such as? > > > > Thanks! > > Jeff > > > > > > Some atomic changes he made. alpha/include/atomic.h rev 1.17 (try 1.16) alpha/alpha/atomic.s rev 1.6 (try 1.5) John thinks the expensive extra memory barriers in the atomic ops may have masked existing pmap problems. I've been running the patch for 2 months on a UP config and not seen any problems. I did once see a strange Heisenbug when using an SMP kernel on a UP machine, but, again, not sure if that's related to the atomic changes. Once I put in a ktr to trace the trap, the bug disappeared. Since you're using the K0SEG, I"m not sure how pmap comes into play. Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15817.44172.809351.382956>