Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 09:17:22 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Munehiro Matsuda <haro@h4.dion.ne.jp>, tanimura@r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp, phk@FreeBSD.ORG, hitmaster2k@yahoo.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG, smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -current lock warning... Message-ID: <20020317171722.GZ4857@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020317120811.965J-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <20020317163953.GY4857@elvis.mu.org> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020317120811.965J-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG> [020317 09:08] wrote: > > On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > * Munehiro Matsuda <haro@h4.dion.ne.jp> [020317 06:36] wrote: > > > > > > PS. I got another message that happend when I ^C'ed a buildworld earlier, > > > with same kernel. May be it should go to Alfred Perlstein? > > > > > > lock order reversal > > > 1st 0xc198eec0 pipe mutex @ ../../../kern/sys_pipe.c:779 > > > 2nd 0xc0367fe0 Giant @ ../../../i386/i386/trap.c:716 > > > > I think there's a place where the pipe can fault on an address while > > copying, I'll take a look at this. > > Are there any assertions that should be in place for copyin/copyout > requring fault handling? It sounds like somewhere we need to assert that > Giant is held... No, you need to assert that no other mutex other than Giant is held. It would be nice... :) -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020317171722.GZ4857>