On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 07:28:57AM -0700, Russ Cox wrote: > > Like Lucio and Cinap, I am skeptical that this is the fix. > > It's a real bug and a correct fix, as we've discussed before, > but if the kernel loses this race I believe it will crash dereferencing nil. > Lucio showed a kernel that was very much still running. > And a very busy one, at that, because while I had stats(1) running, it showed load at max. I may not remember correctly, but I think there lots of context switches as well, but load was saturating.
I can re-create the problem if anybody wants me to help diagnose it. ++L
