From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 16 05:40:05 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E40A31065670 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:40:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF27A8FC17 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:40:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mBG5e5JE064571 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:40:05 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id mBG5e5wT064570; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:40:05 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:40:05 GMT Message-Id: <200812160540.mBG5e5wT064570@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Sean Bruno Cc: Subject: Re: kern/118093: firewire bus reset hogs CPU, causing data to be lost X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Sean Bruno List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:40:06 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/118093; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Sean Bruno To: Dieter Cc: freebsd-firewire@freebsd.org, bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/118093: firewire bus reset hogs CPU, causing data to be lost Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 21:14:32 -0800 Dieter wrote: > I found the source of this problem. When a firewire bus resets, > the firewire driver prints a few lines to the console, > using printf(9) and device_printf(9). I suspect that these are > running at splfw aka splimp, locking out other i/o. > > Commenting out the *printf() calls fixes the problem, but that > isn't a good solution. > > Would changing the *printf() calls to log(9) calls be safe? > ("safe" meaning other i/o doesn't get locked out) > > Ah, for the good old days when 19200 baud seemed fast... > _______________________________________________ > Which one are you looking at Dieter? Sean