From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 13 18:52:34 2005 Return-Path: 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 8BB0416A4CE for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:52:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail14.speakeasy.net (mail22.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.24]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2390843D46 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:52:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 14694 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2005 18:52:33 -0000 Received: from dsl027-160-063.atl1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender ) encrypted SMTP for ; 13 Jan 2005 18:52:33 -0000 Received: from [10.50.41.243] (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0DIqGuw035159; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:52:27 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) From: John Baldwin To: Peter Holm Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:43:26 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <20050109214454.GA60018@peter.osted.lan> <200501121503.29257.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20050113114939.GA79046@peter.osted.lan> In-Reply-To: <20050113114939.GA79046@peter.osted.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200501131343.26286.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on server.baldwin.cx cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: panic: proc not held @ fs/procfs/procfs_regs.c:60 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:52:34 -0000 On Thursday 13 January 2005 06:49 am, Peter Holm wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 03:03:29PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Sunday 09 January 2005 04:44 pm, Peter Holm wrote: > > > With GENERIC HEAD from Jan 8 08:45 UTC I got: > > > > > > panic(c0826351,c0826973,c082fcfc,3,c175a2e0) at panic+0xd8 > > > procfs_doprocregs(c175a2e0,c1b1b5e8,c1665d80,0,ce778c90) at > > > procfs_doprocregs+0x10a pfs_read(ce778c1c,20000,c1f19e04,c08294ba,845) > > > at pfs_read+0x20f > > > vn_read(c1b17ae4,ce778c90,c1a9c080,0,c175a2e0) at vn_read+0x1b9 > > > dofileread(8,bfbfea50,4c,ffffffff,ffffffff) at dofileread+0x82 > > > read(c175a2e0,ce778d14,3,1,282) at read+0x44 > > > syscall(2f,2f,2f,8059f48,a7c) at syscall+0x128 > > > > > > Details at http://www.holm.cc/stress/log/cons105.html > > > > Hmm, looking at procfs_doprocregs() I'm not sure how it could lose the > > proc lock. The assertion must be in one of the PROC_UNLOCK(). Can you > > do a listing of the procfs_doprocregs() frame to see where it died? > > No, sorry. I seem to have fumbled the backup of the tree before I > did an update :-( > > But isn't the panic in this code: > > procfs_regs.c, Revision 1.29.2.1 > 1.24 jhb 59: PROC_LOCK(p); > 1.29.2.1! das 60: KASSERT(p->p_lock > 0, ("proc not held")); Ah, doh. Too many different locks around. :( Weird, pfs_read() does a _PHOLD and PRELE around calling procfs_doprocregs(), so I'm not sure how this happened. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org