From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jan 27 13:06:25 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 C8E8C16A4CE; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:06:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 0423E43D5C; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:06:04 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0RL4UuO008564;
	Tue, 27 Jan 2004 22:04:31 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:56:12 EST."
             <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040127155447.47712A-100000@fledge.watson.org> 
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 22:04:30 +0100
Message-ID: <8563.1075237470@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: Chip Norkus <wd@teleri.net>
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Processes blocked on ufs or getblk 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:06:25 -0000

In message <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040127155447.47712A-100000@fledge.watson.org>, Robe
rt Watson writes:

>There is interest in this bug, and a couple of people are running into it. 

Can we please keep track of which scheduler people are using ?

I had to abandon some tests earlier today after I found out that SCHED_4BSD
was happy to leave certain kthreads in runnable state without actually
giving them to a CPU.

Switching to SCHED_ULE allowed me to complete my tests.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.