From owner-freebsd-emulation Sat Oct 3 11:58:41 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA12672 for freebsd-emulation-outgoing; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 11:58:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from word.smith.net.au (castles246.castles.com [208.214.165.246]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA12596 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 11:58:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@word.smith.net.au) Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by word.smith.net.au (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA07047; Sat, 3 Oct 1998 12:01:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@word.smith.net.au) Message-Id: <199810031901.MAA07047@word.smith.net.au> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: John Fieber cc: nash@mcs.net, emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Sybase update In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 03 Oct 1998 10:15:58 CDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1998 12:01:48 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > * The SIGIO and SIGURG values in linux.h were reversed. I > > > think they must have come from an incorrect man page (I found > > > one on the net that had them wrong). > > > > When you say "reversed", can you be more specific? The header I have > > here gives SIGIO and SIGURG the same value (23). > > I "misspoke"...not reversed. A real linux kernel has SIGURG as > 23 and SIGIO as 29 (and SIGPOLL as a synonym for SIGIO). When > sybase installs the SIGIO handler, it uses signal 29. Ok. Definitely worth getting that fixed. > > > Note that fixing the second without fixing the first resulted in a > > > panic suggesting that somewhere in the kernel, there must be some > > > action on the signals. > > > > That's not too good. Did you get an idea as to where the panic was? > > First time I was on an X display and didn't see any messages. > Second time I did it where I could see the messages an the only > one was "panic syncing disks" or whatever the text is...no > details about where. If you could replicate it with a kernel containing DDB, it would be interesting to see if we could get a trace. My suspicion is that it was probably in the emulator LKM. > > It sounds like you're extremely close. If you build the Linux LKM with > > DEBUG defined, you should get a pile of "linux_sendsig" messages. You > > can see the code that's meant to send the signal into the Linux process > > in linux_sysvec.c:linux_sendsig(). > > I already turned on that particulary debugging printf there and > no SIGIOs show up. Is there something I can use to examine the > flags on the socket to see if the async flag got properly set? Whack a few quick printfs in kern/uipc_socket2.c:sowakeup(), as this is where the signal is generated. > > Interesting. Does the Linux uname(2) call return a fully-qualified > > hostname? > > I believe so which is which I'm doubting this is the real > problem. More interesting. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-emulation" in the body of the message