Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 17:43:48 +0000 (GMT) From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Panic in FFS/4.0 as of yesterday - update Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9902211739590.82049-100000@herring.nlsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9902210907120.2677-100000@feral-gw>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 21 Feb 1999, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > Sorry to say that during testing last night (in the middle of which a > buildworld got started) the system paniced again with a 'panic: getnewbuf > infinite recursion failure'. I've left it in the debugger if anyone could > suggest looking at something. I'm going to New Orleans tomorrow so it can > sit in the debugger until Friday... > > A very cursory look at the code makes me wonder 'why the value of 5 for a > limit'? It doesn't seem to me a panic is a good solution. Apart from the use of 5 as a 'magic' number, this code doesn't cope with being reentered by another process - the recursion test needs to be on a per-process basis. I'm sure that if you check the stack trace, you won't see any kind of recursion happening. I would suggest disabling it entirely to see if the system survives any better. If that helps, perhaps it should be using a field in struct proc to record the recursion depth. -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9902211739590.82049-100000>