Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:03:29 -0500
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: panic: proc not held @ fs/procfs/procfs_regs.c:60
Message-ID:  <200501121503.29257.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050109214454.GA60018@peter.osted.lan>
References:  <20050109214454.GA60018@peter.osted.lan>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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 <jhb@FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve"  =  http://www.FreeBSD.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200501121503.29257.jhb>