Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:01:34 -0400 From: Randall Stewart <rrs@cisco.com> To: attilio@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Don't know what I was doing but... Message-ID: <466C205E.2000902@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <466BFE92.6000804@FreeBSD.org> References: <466BEA69.1010708@cisco.com> <466BFE2A.7020908@FreeBSD.org> <466BFE92.6000804@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Attilio Rao wrote: > Attilio Rao wrote: > >> Randall Stewart wrote: >> >>> Hi all: >>> >>> I have a fairly recent current.. like yesterday I think.. and >>> I just saw this tumble out (I usually run with witness and invariants >>> on in my laptop now :-D) >>> >>> lock order reversal: >>> 1st 0xc0b79f70 sched lock (sched lock) @ kern/sched_4bsd.c:846 >>> 2nd 0xc0bec658 descriptor tables (descriptor tables) @ >>> i386/i386/sys_machdep.c:363 >> >> >> Mm, since dt_lock is a leaf mutex, the opposite case seems quite >> impossible, so I expect this would be the result of some other bug... >> if next cvsup doesn't fix it, just let me know and I will look into >> this. > > > More precisely, I'd like to better study effects recent thread_lock > introduction had on witness rules. > > Attilio > I did a sup this AM... I will re-do that then cvs update and build... R -- Randall Stewart NSSTG - Cisco Systems Inc. 803-345-0369 <or> 803-317-4952 (cell)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?466C205E.2000902>