From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Tue Jan 17 21:35:43 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3D4ECB5904 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 21:35:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hps@selasky.org) Received: from mail.turbocat.net (turbocat.net [88.99.82.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD76B1676; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 21:35:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hps@selasky.org) Received: from hps2016.home.selasky.org (unknown [62.141.129.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.turbocat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1DADD1FE025; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 22:35:23 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Strange issue after early AP startup To: Ian Lepore , John Baldwin References: <2215603.KuBd8pM5Pm@ralph.baldwin.cx> <3cbe6454-82cc-0592-4ee6-3c1552b19f9a@selasky.org> <4212167.Wq8tLU1ohU@ralph.baldwin.cx> <1484682389.86335.166.camel@freebsd.org> <11f27a15-f9bc-8988-a17e-78aeff1745fb@selasky.org> Cc: FreeBSD Current , Konstantin Belousov From: Hans Petter Selasky Message-ID: <9d0f6789-35cf-7fed-643a-237ddb29f373@selasky.org> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 22:35:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <11f27a15-f9bc-8988-a17e-78aeff1745fb@selasky.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 21:35:43 -0000 On 01/17/17 22:28, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > + state->nextcall = SBT_MAX; > + state->nextcallopt = now + 1; BTW: What locks are protecting the update of these fields? Can they be written simultaneously by configtimer() and cpu_new_callout()? --HPS