Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 15:58:17 -0500 From: Doug Swarin <doug@staff.texas.net> To: Peter Edwards <pmedwards@eircom.net> Cc: gallatin@cs.duke.edu, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Vinum crash Message-ID: <20020823155817.A82817@staff.texas.net> In-Reply-To: <20020823202017.0E2C043E3B@mx1.FreeBSD.org>; from pmedwards@eircom.net on Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 09:20:02PM %2B0100 References: <20020823202017.0E2C043E3B@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 09:20:02PM +0100, Peter Edwards wrote: > "Peter Edwards" <pmedwards@eircom.net> wrote: > Urgh. Forget it, I was seeing references to rq that weren't there. > > > Hi, > > > > Ok, I'm up to my neck in code I've never seen and making wild > > guesses, but: > > > > In vinumrequest.c:launch_requests(), isn't it possible that the > > final BUF_STRATEGY() from line 431 completes before we get back to the top of the outer "for" loop and that complete_rqe gets called for the > > last buffer (we don't have splbio()), bringing the refcount of the > > entire request down to zero, then freeing the request. You then get to the top of the loop, and rq will have been freed, but you looking at its contents. Ok, maybe not likely but... > > > > I suppose you could just hold one more reference to the request while doing launch_requests() and check after all theB UF_STRATEGYs are done when you decrement the active count and find it's zero, then do the "request-finished" processing as done by complete_rqe > > > > Just a thought... > > -- > > Peter Edwards. I've already got a patch for this; it's in PR kern/41740, along with another that allows you to safely hot-revive a striped plex. Doug Swarin doug@texas.net 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?20020823155817.A82817>