Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:34:49 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Tony Arcieri <tarcieri@atmos.colostate.edu> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sched_ule.c (fwd) Message-ID: <20041215213449.GB99458@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20041215210119.GF17276@flash.atmos.colostate.edu> References: <20041214222444.GA9668@flash.atmos.colostate.edu> <3308.192.168.1.9.1103065723.squirrel@192.168.1.9> <20041215001222.GB9957@flash.atmos.colostate.edu> <41BF9130.9070907@freebsd.org> <20041215152931.H60504@mail.chesapeake.net> <20041215210119.GF17276@flash.atmos.colostate.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--i9LlY+UWpKt15+FH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 02:01:19PM -0700, Tony Arcieri wrote: > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 03:32:14PM -0500, Jeff Roberson wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Scott Long wrote: > >=20 > > I'm definitely not against these fixes going into RELENG_5, but I would > > > like to see some significant testing be applied to them in HEAD first, > > > especially to changes that are not confined to just sched_ule.c (and > > > sched_4bsd.c). > >=20 > > Can I commit changes that are restricted to sched_ule.c? It certainly > > can't make things any worse than they are on RELENG_5 now. We can leave > > the #error in until it's really tested on head. That way only people w= ho > > remove that line of code can use it. >=20 > The changes to kern_sig.c are also necessary to ensure the stability of > the ULE scheduler, correct? I guess I'll just keep running with a kernel > build with RELENG_5 sources and sched_ule.c, kern_switch.c, and=20 > kern_sig.c from head. >=20 > And am I correct that the UMA implementation in RELENG_5 has rendered > proc_fini() obsolete and thus it won't ever be called? FYI, after I updated an SMP machine (with 4BSD) yesterday it got into a state where all processes were sleeping and the only running processes were the idle tasks, but nothing was apparently holding a lock. This is just after the most recent commit to kern_sig.c, so it's one possible candidate for the cause. I backed out this change, and so far it hasn't recurred. Kris --i9LlY+UWpKt15+FH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBwK35Wry0BWjoQKURAgEcAJ9BkZG1JPcnuRB/MoIqlx/OB2LDlACfRh6d l+J9iQbXMIYWFBCsgi0qoJM= =Uf/5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --i9LlY+UWpKt15+FH--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041215213449.GB99458>