Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 15:10:32 +0200 From: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: panic in recent RELENG_5 tcp code path Message-ID: <20050520131031.GU818@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> In-Reply-To: <20050520080435.GB26938@cell.sick.ru> References: <20050515120007.GA777@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20050518155130.H87264@carver.gumbysoft.com> <20050519125639.GK818@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20050520080435.GB26938@cell.sick.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Gleb,
> according to the fact that the panic occured in dereferncing mbuf pointer
> your kernel is compiled without INVARIANTS.
>
> Please compile it with INVARIANTS. This will probably help to trigger panic
> earlier, and it will be more clear.
a quick look at src/conf/NOTES reveals the following :
%%%
#
# The INVARIANTS option is used in a number of source files to enable
# extra sanity checking of internal structures. This support is not
# enabled by default because of the extra time it would take to check
# for these conditions, which can only occur as a result of
# programming errors.
#
%%%
I'm going to recompile my kernel with INVARIANTS but I wonder in
which order of magniture it will slow my kernel down. In other words,
what does INVARIANTS do concretely, shall I expect a performance drop
like WITNESS does ?
Best regards,
--
Jeremie Le Hen
< jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050520131031.GU818>