Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:34:35 -0600
From:      Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: panic: sbflush_locked
Message-ID:  <20041222203435.GN1362@cs.rice.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041222085240.62809E-100000@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <20041220201953.GI1362@cs.rice.edu> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041222085240.62809E-100000@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 22, 2004 at 08:55:31AM +0000, Robert Watson wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > > I haven't seen this in a very long time, but I've definitely tried to
> > > track it down before with zero luck.
> > 
> > With the attached change, I've had no more crashes. 
> > 
> > I speculate uipc_send() is missing needed synchronization on so_snd. 
> > Robert, can you verify the patch? 
> 
> Sorry for the delay in responding to your original post; I'm still
> catching up with e-mail from my trip to Bangladesh.  I actually had
> similar changes to this in the netperf branch at one point, but think I
> removed them due to concerns about lock order.  However, this change is
> careful to acquire the send lock before the receive lock, so I think
> shouldn't present a problem from that perspective.  Please go ahead and
> commit, perhaps with a 2 week MFC time? 

I just committed the patch.  Thanks for the review.

Alan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041222203435.GN1362>