On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:32:24AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> With your latest patch applied, I ran through my procedure more
> than a dozen times and no panics!
>
> Any explanation why sleep(STALL_TIMEOUT) as apposed to a
> bunch of sleep(1)'s tickles the panic?
What happened was sleep() got
Let me preface this by saying that I know nothing about this particular
bit of code, but...
As a general rule, I would question the use of gettimeofday() while
panicing. At that stage, everything could have already gone down the
plug hole.
That said, it already calls sleep(), so maybe that
With your latest patch applied, I ran through my procedure more
than a dozen times and no panics!
Any explanation why sleep(STALL_TIMEOUT) as apposed to a
bunch of sleep(1)'s tickles the panic?
Also, it is definitely not sleeping for 30 seconds. I guess some
event interrupts the sleep loop?
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 06:31:59PM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> Reverted your patch then changed line 1011 of init.c to _exit(97):
>
> --- init.c-orig 2016-10-05 18:52:24.02291 +1000
> +++ init.c 2016-10-06 17:02:33.714624000 +1000
> @@ -1008,7 +1008,7 @@
> */
> warning("single user shell
On 2016-Oct-04 11:14:38 +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
>Is it just me or
>
>Step 1: boot
>Step 2: login as root
>Step 3: type "w" *
>Step 4: type "shutdown now; logout"
>Step 5: press at the 'Enter full pathname of shell or RETURN for
>/bin/sh:' prompt
>Step 6: type "reboot"
Reverted your patch then changed line 1011 of init.c to _exit(97):
--- init.c-orig 2016-10-05 18:52:24.02291 +1000
+++ init.c 2016-10-06 17:02:33.714624000 +1000
@@ -1008,7 +1008,7 @@
*/
warning("single user shell terminated.");
sleep(STALL_TIMEOUT);
- _exit(0);
+ _exit(97);
} else {
On 05/10/2016 23:36, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> Please try this variation, I want to see if the error code changed.
Afraid not. Still signal 0, exit 0.
Screenshot: http://imgur.com/AU6weU0
-andyf
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:32:33PM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> On 05/10/2016 18:43, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>
> > Apply the following patch. I am interested if anything additional appear
> > on the console. Screenshot is good enough.
>
> Patch applied. Panic (easlily!) reproduced. No
On 05/10/2016 18:43, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> Apply the following patch. I am interested if anything additional appear
> on the console. Screenshot is good enough.
Patch applied. Panic (easlily!) reproduced. No additional output.
Screenshot: http://imgur.com/KOOBysH
I guess init is
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 05:32:18AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> On 04/10/2016 23:11, Andy Farkas wrote:
> > On 04/10/2016 21:24, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 11:14:38AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> >>> Is it just me or
> >>>
> >>> Step 1: boot
> >>> Step 2: login as
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 11:14:38AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> Is it just me or
>
> Step 1: boot
> Step 2: login as root
> Step 3: type "w" *
> Step 4: type "shutdown now; logout"
> Step 5: press at the 'Enter full pathname of shell or RETURN for
> /bin/sh:' prompt
> Step 6: type "reboot"
>
Is it just me or
Step 1: boot
Step 2: login as root
Step 3: type "w" *
Step 4: type "shutdown now; logout"
Step 5: press at the 'Enter full pathname of shell or RETURN for
/bin/sh:' prompt
Step 6: type "reboot"
Step 7: get a Panic: "Going nowhere without my init!"
* The panic will not
12 matches
Mail list logo