From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Wed Jan 18 01:20:55 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 EF27BCB49F2 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 01:20:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE8EC137A; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 01:20:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from ralph.baldwin.cx (c-73-231-226-104.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.231.226.104]) by mail.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BCA5A10A7DB; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 20:20:54 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: Hans Petter Selasky Cc: Ian Lepore , FreeBSD Current , Konstantin Belousov Subject: Re: Strange issue after early AP startup Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 17:14:31 -0800 Message-ID: <98986414.HD1czBRNas@ralph.baldwin.cx> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (FreeBSD/11.0-STABLE; KDE/4.14.10; amd64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <9d0f6789-35cf-7fed-643a-237ddb29f373@selasky.org> References: <11f27a15-f9bc-8988-a17e-78aeff1745fb@selasky.org> <9d0f6789-35cf-7fed-643a-237ddb29f373@selasky.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (mail.baldwin.cx); Tue, 17 Jan 2017 20:20:54 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean 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: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 01:20:56 -0000 On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 10:35:06 PM Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > 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()? Both functions do ET_HW_LOCK() of DPCPU_PTR(timerstate). -- John Baldwin