On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 04:07:45PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
Is it just a warning or does it pose a real problem?
I think the problem with the current code is that knote_{en,de}queue can
be executed in parallel (on another CPU, spl*() can't prevent that, can
Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
Imagine this scenario where CPU 0 inserts a knote kn1 (the marker) in
knote_scan and CPU 1 kn2 in kqueue_enqueue:
CPU 0 | CPU 1
+---
kn1-kn_tqe.tqe_next = NULL;|
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 09:26:29PM -0700, Don Lewis wrote:
On 8 Oct, Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 03:48:45AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Following the advice from the spl* man page I turned the spl* calls to a
mutex and was surprised to see it working. My SMP
Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
Is it just a warning or does it pose a real problem?
I think the problem with the current code is that knote_{en,de}queue can
be executed in parallel (on another CPU, spl*() can't prevent that, can
it?) with kqueue_scan and that kq-kq_head thus can be corrupted.
Or
On 10 Oct, Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 09:26:29PM -0700, Don Lewis wrote:
On 8 Oct, Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
However, WITNESS complains (only once) about this:
lock order reversal
1st 0xc662140c kqueue mutex (kqueue mutex) @
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 03:48:45AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
*** OK, it's very hard to believe you didn't break into the
*** debugger and manually call pnaic to get this to happen.
You're right, this is exactly what I did.
I can't personally repeat the problem, so you're elected to do
On 8 Oct, Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 03:48:45AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Following the advice from the spl* man page I turned the spl* calls to a
mutex and was surprised to see it working. My SMP -current survived a 'make
-j16 buildworld' with make using kqueue()
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 11:14:26PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Stefan: Did the patch fix it, or not?
Sorry for the long delay. No, it did not. But I now have a rather
interesting core dump. I inserted a KASSERT, so that the code looks like
this:
TAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(kq-kq_head, marker,
Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 11:14:26PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Stefan: Did the patch fix it, or not?
Sorry for the long delay. No, it did not. But I now have a rather
interesting core dump. I inserted a KASSERT, so that the code looks like
this:
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
I'm confused why marker - if it was removed by TAILQ_REMOVE - hasn't
kn_tqe.tqe_next and kn_tqe.tqe_prev set to (void *)-1.
because that only happens if the debug code in queue.h is enabled, which
it is not..
OK,
Terry Lambert wrote:
Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
(kgdb) l *kqueue_scan+0x242
0xc01a1212 is in kqueue_scan
(/freebsd/current/src/sys/kern/kern_event.c:716).
713 TAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(kq-kq_head, marker, kn_tqe);
714 while (count) {
715 kn =
Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
(kgdb) l *kqueue_scan+0x242
0xc01a1212 is in kqueue_scan
(/freebsd/current/src/sys/kern/kern_event.c:716).
713 TAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(kq-kq_head, marker, kn_tqe);
714 while (count) {
715 kn = TAILQ_FIRST(kq-kq_head);
12 matches
Mail list logo
