From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 4 01:07:47 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79348328; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 01:07:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EA5B29C; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 01:07:46 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqAEAJ0ID1GDaFvO/2dsb2JhbAA8CIZItQ+DdHOCHwEBBSNWGw4KAgINGQJZBogkrSeRVIEjjAODGYETA4hmjTmJVYZ8gxqCBg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,596,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="14893958" Received: from erie.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.206]) by esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 03 Feb 2013 20:07:45 -0500 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD66FB3F44; Sun, 3 Feb 2013 20:07:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2013 20:07:45 -0500 (EST) From: Rick Macklem To: Andriy Gapon Message-ID: <1515954355.2640466.1359940065810.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <510E9877.5000701@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: panic: LK_RETRY set with incompatible flags MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [172.17.91.203] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.10_GA_2692 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/6.0.10_GA_2692) Cc: Konstantin Belousov , FreeBSD Current , Sergey Kandaurov X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 01:07:47 -0000 Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 03/02/2013 18:36 Rick Macklem said the following: > > I can think of two possibilities: > > 1 - ZFS isn't setting VV_ROOT on the root vnode under some > > condition. > > or > > 2 - The vnode was left locked from some previous operation that > > happened > > to be done by this thread. Doesn't seem likely, but??? > > > > Maybe Sergey could try the change to line#1451 and see if the panic > > still happens. If not, that would suggest possibility #1, I think. > > If the kernel is configured with witness, then it should be easy to > check where > the exclusive lock was taken (file and line number). > Yep. If Sergey can reproduce this using a kernel with witness, doing "show witness" to see where the lock on the directory vnode was acquired, could be helpful. rick > -- > Andriy Gapon