Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 20:02:12 +0300 From: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> Cc: mdf@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r212964 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <4C98E514.7090107@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4C98E324.8090803@feral.com> References: <201009211507.o8LF7iVv097676@svn.freebsd.org> <4C98D200.4040909@freebsd.org> <AANLkTim%2BZYppETzFOYrGjhsEXr9hVPi8L0Mvaa6RkhMq@mail.gmail.com> <201009211250.40704.jhb@freebsd.org> <4C98E324.8090803@feral.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Jacob wrote: > >> Err, I don't think _mtx_lock_sleep() is guarded in that fashion? I >> have an >> old patch to do that but have never committed it. If we want that we >> should >> probably change rwlocks and sxlocks to have also not block when >> panicstr is >> set. > > Seems to me you are backing into interesting territory here- getting a > bit more like Solaris. > > If you *do* do this, then you really *do* need to stop all other CPUs > when you panic, or else it's likely you'll double panic more often than > not. May be it is not so bad idea to get more coherent memory snapshot? -- Alexander Motin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C98E514.7090107>