Hi,
I just noticed very unstable ISDN connections since the introduction of
preempted interrupt threads (Jan 31st). Most errors are uncritical though,
an active connection continues to work, sometimes I have to restart isdnd,
and sometimes I even have to reboot the machine.
The "i4b-L1
Warner Losh wrote:
I've added INVARIANTS and WITNESS to my kernel. Today I get a random
panic on boot sometimes:
lock order reseral (this doesn't cause the panic, but
does seem to happen all the time)
1st vnode interlock last acquired @
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001 17:04:44 +1030, Matthew Thyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
find seems to be traversing all file systems (local and non-local)
but just not reporting the found file when its on a non-local
filesystem.
As has been discussed many times before, this is correct behavior. If
you
Robert Watson wrote:
Hmm. I've been getting this on an ATA box as well. Don't seem to get it
when softupdates is not set on the root partition, but that's just an
observation from a couple of boxes. (Sample size == 2 - confidence level
= 0).
I don't have softupdates on root (but I do
Warner Losh schrieb:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Daniel Rock writes:
: I did have the same problem. But just rebuilding binutils didn't help either.
: Trying to rebuild libc resulted in above SEGV from as. Some sort of Catch 22
Find a libc from before Feb 10th or after Feb 21 and put it
Bruce Evans schrieb:
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Daniel Rock wrote:
You may have forgotten to also change KINFO_PROC_SIZE in src/sys/user.h
Yes, rev.1.31 of src/sys/sys/user.h leaves it as an exercise to change
KINFO_PROC_SIZE.
I hate doing such exercises, since it will be followed by some
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Warner Losh writes:
: I note that this doesn't happen when the disks are clean on boot, but
: does happen when they are dirty. The kernel is as of a cvsup 3pm MST
: today. The kernel from 1am last night doesn't seem to have this
: problem.
Doesn't seem to have this
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Daniel C. Sobral" writes:
: I don't have softupdates on root (but I do have elsewhere... which
: reminds me I need to turn it on on a recently created partition :).
It still seems to happen for me on a box that has softupdates
disabled. But its frequency is far far
I got a panic today on a fresh kernel...
Compiled with netgraph but non of the netgraph modules.
Immediately after the memory probe, a message about sequencers 0-15,
then:
Panic: spinlock ng_worklist not in order list
Before these was WARNING: size of kinfo_proc (648) should be 644!!!
-- Pete
On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 02:33:23PM -0800, Pete Carah wrote:
I got a panic today on a fresh kernel...
Compiled with netgraph but non of the netgraph modules.
Immediately after the memory probe, a message about sequencers 0-15,
then:
Panic: spinlock ng_worklist not in order list
Before
On 24-Feb-01 John Baldwin wrote:
jhb 2001/02/24 11:36:13 PST
Modified files:
sys/kern kern_mutex.c
Log:
...
- Make the _mtx_assert() function be compiled in if INVARIANTS_SUPPORT is
defined rather than if INVARIANTS is defined so that a KLD
On 24-Feb-01 Julian Elischer wrote:
Warner Losh wrote:
I've added INVARIANTS and WITNESS to my kernel. Today I get a random
panic on boot sometimes:
lock order reseral (this doesn't cause the panic, but
does seem to happen all the time)
On 24-Feb-01 Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bruce
Evans writes:
: It seems to be another trap while holding sched_lock. This should be
: fatal, but the problem is only detected because trap() enables
: interrupts. Then an interrupt causes bad things to happen.
Pete Carah wrote:
I got a panic today on a fresh kernel...
Compiled with netgraph but non of the netgraph modules.
Immediately after the memory probe, a message about sequencers 0-15,
then:
Panic: spinlock ng_worklist not in order list
Before these was WARNING: size of kinfo_proc
Pete Carah wrote:
I got a panic today on a fresh kernel...
Compiled with netgraph but non of the netgraph modules.
Immediately after the memory probe, a message about sequencers 0-15,
then:
Panic: spinlock ng_worklist not in order list
argh,
ignore that last message..
maybe I don;t
Julian Elischer wrote:
Pete Carah wrote:
I got a panic today on a fresh kernel...
Compiled with netgraph but non of the netgraph modules.
Immediately after the memory probe, a message about sequencers 0-15,
then:
Panic: spinlock ng_worklist not in order list
The
Pete Carah wrote:
I got a panic today on a fresh kernel...
Compiled with netgraph but non of the netgraph modules.
Immediately after the memory probe, a message about sequencers 0-15,
then:
Panic: spinlock ng_worklist not in order list
Before these was WARNING: size of kinfo_proc
Jake Burkholder wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
Pete Carah wrote:
I got a panic today on a fresh kernel...
Compiled with netgraph but non of the netgraph modules.
Immediately after the memory probe, a message about sequencers 0-15,
then:
Panic: spinlock
Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001 17:04:44 +1030, Matthew Thyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
find seems to be traversing all file systems (local and non-local)
but just not reporting the found file when its on a non-local
filesystem.
As has been discussed many times before, this
19 matches
Mail list logo
