Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 18:14:19 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> Cc: mckusick@freebsd.org, Sergey Kandaurov <pluknet@gmail.com>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: panic, seems related to r234386 Message-ID: <4FA8736B.1040300@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20120507201153.GA19942@dft-labs.eu> References: <4FA6F324.4080107@FreeBSD.org> <CAE-mSOJBHPP4E_2Hme5nwf0fGfckyRBWeAe9=kodHMmS6eQy%2Bg@mail.gmail.com> <4FA82269.6080406@FreeBSD.org> <20120507201153.GA19942@dft-labs.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/07/2012 13:11, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 12:28:41PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 05/06/2012 15:19, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
>>> On 7 May 2012 01:54, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>> I got this with today's current, previous (working) kernel is r232719.
>>>>
>>>> panic: _mtx_lock_sleep: recursed on non-recursive mutex struct mount mtx
>>>> @ /frontier/svn/head/sys/kern/vfs_subr.c:4595
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> Please try this patch.
Ok, so far so good. Again, thanks for the quick response. I'm
stress-testing my ext2fs partitions a bit atm, and everything seems Ok.
I'll let you know if I run into any problems.
So my next question is, does removing those locks present any risks?
Should they be replaced by different locks, or were they just safety
belts to start with?
Finally, should my next step be to advance to the latest current + your
patch and see how I go from there?
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FA8736B.1040300>