From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 12 20:11:28 2005 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 895CA16A4CE for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20:11:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail5.speakeasy.net (mail5.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.205]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 372D243D45 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20:11:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 18664 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2005 20:11:28 -0000 Received: from dsl027-160-063.atl1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender ) encrypted SMTP for ; 12 Jan 2005 20:11:27 -0000 Received: from [10.50.41.243] (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0CKBIGF027541; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:11:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:03:29 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <20050109214454.GA60018@peter.osted.lan> In-Reply-To: <20050109214454.GA60018@peter.osted.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200501121503.29257.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on server.baldwin.cx cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: panic: proc not held @ fs/procfs/procfs_regs.c:60 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: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20:11:28 -0000 On Sunday 09 January 2005 04:44 pm, Peter Holm wrote: > With GENERIC HEAD from Jan 8 08:45 UTC I got: > > panic(c0826351,c0826973,c082fcfc,3,c175a2e0) at panic+0xd8 > procfs_doprocregs(c175a2e0,c1b1b5e8,c1665d80,0,ce778c90) at > procfs_doprocregs+0x10a pfs_read(ce778c1c,20000,c1f19e04,c08294ba,845) at > pfs_read+0x20f > vn_read(c1b17ae4,ce778c90,c1a9c080,0,c175a2e0) at vn_read+0x1b9 > dofileread(8,bfbfea50,4c,ffffffff,ffffffff) at dofileread+0x82 > read(c175a2e0,ce778d14,3,1,282) at read+0x44 > syscall(2f,2f,2f,8059f48,a7c) at syscall+0x128 > > Details at http://www.holm.cc/stress/log/cons105.html Hmm, looking at procfs_doprocregs() I'm not sure how it could lose the proc lock. The assertion must be in one of the PROC_UNLOCK(). Can you do a listing of the procfs_doprocregs() frame to see where it died? -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org