From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun 10 18:58:29 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD3B106564A;
	Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:58:29 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from matthew.fleming@isilon.com)
Received: from seaxch09.isilon.com (seaxch09.isilon.com [74.85.160.25])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B7BB8FC1E;
	Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:58:29 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from matthew.fleming@isilon.com)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:45:49 -0700
Message-ID: <06D5F9F6F655AD4C92E28B662F7F853E02CC8A29@seaxch09.desktop.isilon.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090609163005.GD75569@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: panic: knlist not locked, but should be
Thread-Index: AcnpH7C6SYxr8U7sQy2GgnHJMBNdeQAAKEcA
References: <20090609110540.GA1290@darklight.homeunix.org><200906090937.37562.jhb@freebsd.org><20090609135145.GB1290@darklight.homeunix.org><200906091059.15278.jhb@freebsd.org>
	<20090609163005.GD75569@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
From: "Matthew Fleming" <matthew.fleming@isilon.com>
To: "Kostik Belousov" <kostikbel@gmail.com>, "John Baldwin" <jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:14:38 +0000
Cc: Yuri Pankov <yuri.pankov@gmail.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org,
	Paul Saab <ps@freebsd.org>
Subject: RE: panic: knlist not locked, but should be
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:58:29 -0000


> This appears to be an interaction with the recent changes to use=20
> shared vnode locks for writes on ZFS.  Hmm, I think it may be ok to=20
> use a shared vnode lock for kevents on vnodes though.  The vnode=20
> interlock should be sufficient locking for what little work the kevent

> filters do.  As a quick hack for now the MNT_SHARED_WRITES() stuff=20
> could avoid using shared locks 'if (!VN_KNLIST_EMPTY(vp))', but I=20
> think the longer term fix is to not use the vnode locks for vnode
kevents, but use the interlock instead.

I tried (briefly) using the interlock since Isilon's vnode lock is
cluster wide (in our 6.1 based code we got away with using Giant).  This
got me a LOR report on the interlock:

	/*
	 * kqueue/VFS interaction
	 */
	{ "kqueue", &lock_class_mtx_sleep },
	{ "struct mount mtx", &lock_class_mtx_sleep },
	{ "vnode interlock", &lock_class_mtx_sleep },
	{ NULL, NULL },

since knote() will take first the list->kl_lock and then the kqueue
lock.  I didn't spend any time on it, and switched to using the vnode
v_lock for my purposes.  But someone added that lock ordering (r166421)
for a reason.

Cheers,
matthew