Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:19:54 -0800 From: Peter Losher <Peter_Losher@isc.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: spin lock panic in 5.2-REL Message-ID: <200401271420.05240.Peter_Losher@isc.org> In-Reply-To: <200401271334.07761.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <20040127082106.L14045@farside.isc.org> <200401271334.07761.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 27 January 2004 10:34 am, John Baldwin wrote: > This is a very hard to debug problem. If WITNESS is on it provides more > useful information that can help track that down, but I wouldn't expect a > production machine to be using WITNESS. Yes, I was running a kernel for a short while w/ INVARIANTS and WITNESS, bu= t=20 it was basically useless after a couple of hours under load under the giant= =20 lock. How much of a performance hit is just WITNESS? (I also got a "me too" message from someone privately who experianced the s= ame=20 issue after a 5.1->5.2 update) =2D -Peter =2D --=20 Peter_Losher@isc.org | ISC | OpenPGP 0xE8048D08 | "The bits must flow" =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAFuQUPtVx9OgEjQgRAlR1AJwJJ6lFXLgQjX0uwGTnUicCAjx9PwCgs1Q5 v9iUdxy7mvKGloxNMrwb7so=3D =3DxyWP =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200401271420.05240.Peter_Losher>