From owner-freebsd-current Mon May 14 15:40: 5 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CC3F37B42C for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:40:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f4EMc7f77908; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:38:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:38:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Garrett Wollman Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: pgm to kill 4.3 via vm In-Reply-To: <200105142005.QAA29504@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 14 May 2001, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > > > The process and signal-related structures may be inconsistent if the > > debugger disregards existing locks held over those structures. It does > > not matter if code is currently still executing, it matters that > > preemption can occur. The choices appear to be: > > Preemption should never occur while the debugger is running. If those > structures are in an inconsistent state, it *should* be visible to the > debugger. Yes, exactly. The debugger my preempt, and the structures may be in an inconsistent state. Therefor, caution must be used when making use of functions that assume a consistent state, or attempt to make use of locks which may already be held but cannot be released. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message