From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 11 01:19:30 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F0CD16A400 for ; Fri, 11 May 2007 01:19:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59E7B13C43E for ; Fri, 11 May 2007 01:19:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF4841A3C19; Thu, 10 May 2007 18:20:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 82D9E51551; Thu, 10 May 2007 21:19:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 21:19:29 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Scott Swanson Message-ID: <20070511011929.GA76360@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <46438569.1000506@inetz.com> <20070510214348.GA68925@xor.obsecurity.org> <4643C010.7060302@inetz.com> <20070511010654.GA75689@xor.obsecurity.org> <4643C34F.9070504@inetz.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4643C34F.9070504@inetz.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: panic: spin lock held too long (w/ backtrace) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 01:19:30 -0000 On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 07:13:51PM -0600, Scott Swanson wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > > On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 07:00:00PM -0600, Scott Swanson wrote: > > > >>>> Unread portion of the kernel message buffer: > >>>> spin lock smp rendezvous held by 0xc95a5900 for > 5 seconds > >>> What is thread 0xc95a5900 doing? > >>> > >>> Kris > >>> > >> Is this the best way to determine the action of the thread? > >> > >> Regards; > >> Scott > >> > >> (kgdb) info threads > >> 90 Thread 100123 (PID=18303: bsdtar) 0xc0644f5b in sched_switch > >> (td=0xc95a5900, newtd=0xc92aad80, flags=0) at > >> /usr/src/sys/kern/sched_4bsd.c:973 > > > > Yes, now 'proc 18303' and 'bt'. > > > > Kris > > > (kgdb) proc 18303 > (kgdb) bt > #0 0xc0644f5b in sched_switch (td=0xc95a5900, newtd=0xc92aad80, > flags=0) at /usr/src/sys/kern/sched_4bsd.c:973 > #1 0xeaa6dcb4 in ?? () > #2 0x00000001 in ?? () > #3 0x0ee2c000 in ?? () > #4 0x00000000 in ?? () > #5 0x00004000 in ?? () > #6 0x00000000 in ?? () > #7 0x00000000 in ?? () > #8 0xc95a5900 in ?? () > #9 0xeaa6dd30 in ?? () > #10 0xc081a8fb in syscall (frame=Cannot access memory at address 0x4008 > ) at /usr/src/sys/i386/i386/trap.c:983 > Previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?) Garbage :( Are you using any modules? Kris