From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 11 22:28:20 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E016B16A41F for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 22:28:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gw.catspoiler.org (217-ip-163.nccn.net [209.79.217.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FC1D43D46 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 22:28:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (mousie.catspoiler.org [192.168.101.2]) by gw.catspoiler.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j9BMSACh046318; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:28:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <200510112228.j9BMSACh046318@gw.catspoiler.org> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:28:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Lewis To: rob@hudson-trading.com In-Reply-To: <20051011150721.F49494@daemon.mistermishap.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, mikep@hudson-trading.com, jason@hudson-trading.com Subject: Re: freebsd-5.4-stable panics X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 22:28:21 -0000 On 11 Oct, Rob Watt wrote: > On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, Rob Watt wrote: > >> Don, >> >> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Don Lewis wrote: >> >> > Both HEAD and RELENG_6 have been patched. I've tested the following >> > patch for RELENG_5 on a uniprocessor sparc64 box. I'd appreciate it if >> > anyone who was running into this problem on RELENG_5 with SMP hardare >> > could test it before I do the MFC. >> >> We have a machine running with those patches applied. We need to do some >> other tests on it today, but tonight we will run our threaded applications >> that trigger the kern_proc problem in top. We should have results tomorrow >> morning. > > Don, > > I had misunderstood what you had asked. I tested this on a 6.0 machine. I > could not crash an amd64 SMP box running 6.0-BETA5 with this patch. I do > not have a test box running RELENG_5 to try this patch on right now. If I > can setup a test box I will let you know our results, but that may take a > day or two. I MFC'ed the fix to RELENG_6 last week, but the patch didn't apply cleanly to RELENG_5. I tweaked the patch for RELENG_5 and tested it on a UP box. I'd like to get some testing on SMP hardware before I commit it to RELENG_5, just to make sure that I don't destabilize -STABLE. I do want to get the fix into RELENG_5, since this thread originated with a complaint about 5.4-STABLE.