lock order reversal
1st 0xc220b690 rtentry (rtentry) @ /usr/src/sys/net/route.c:182
2nd 0xc204807c radix node head (radix node head) @
/usr/src/sys/net/route.c:133
Stack backtrace:
backtrace(c087588d,c204807c,c087b88a,c087b88a,c087b8e0) at backtrace+0x17
Is anyone else able to reproduce this?
- Forwarded message from pecquetj [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Number: 58581
Category: kern
Synopsis: System call hang 5.x triggered by gnunetd
Confidential: no
Severity: serious
Priority: medium
Responsible:freebsd-bugs
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 11:52:48AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote:
+ I'm committing changes to mark various network drivers' interrupt handlers
+ MPSAFE. To insure folks have a way to backout if they hit problems I've also
+ added a tunable that lets you disable this w/o rebuilding your kernel. By
+
At Wed, 29 Oct 2003 17:32:29 -0800 (PST),
Doug White wrote:
Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
Doug White wrote:
This is normal and for your protection. you can't edit the disk you're
running off of. If you are running off of ad1, make sure 1) you're root
when you run sysinstall and b) you
Jason Barnes wrote:
I am trying to get my Palm Tungsten-E to sync with my FreeBSD
Hi Jason,
I had the interesting task of getting my Tungsten-W to sync the other
week, which I succeeded with, after a few tweaks.
I'm running 5.1-REL, with a couple of patches, see PRs:
kern/58366 and kern/46488
Richard Nyberg wrote:
Doug White wrote:
yes, this is a change to -current. It is for your own safety.
I think this change in current is for the worse. I don't see why
I can't manage slices and partitions from my regular OS, but have
to boot up a CD to do the job. It's not even safer; I am
Harti Brandt wrote:
TLParagraph 6 of:
TL
TL http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/sscanf.html
TL
TLImplies that the lack of characters in the string following the
TLconversion, due to failure in assignment, should result in an
TLInput failure. Note also that stdio.h
Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
On Tue, 28.10.2003 at 23:29:03 -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
It is NOT useless. Why do you think it is? Perhaps you don't relize
that some BIOS's wont boot from a hard disk that isn't partitioned to
agree with the specifications of the PeeCee. If you want to treat
Doug White wrote:
I don't know how WinXP's bootblocks are set up, but I have this setup on
Win2k and it works as expected with boot0.
They are set up to boot directly from NTFS. An NTFS without a small
FAT/FAT16/FAT32 partition for initial load will prevent the boot
selector code from booting
Andy Hilker wrote:
i am using current. Similar problems *without* postfix. Login via ssh
results in print motd, but nothing more.
Login on local console results in nothing after pressing enter on
username.
I think you have a different problem than the one that started this
thread.
It's very
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
TLHarti Brandt wrote:
TL TLParagraph 6 of:
TL TL
TL TL http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/sscanf.html
TL TL
TL TLImplies that the lack of characters in the string following the
TL TLconversion, due to failure in assignment, should
Hi Terry,
first thanks for your answer.
It's very common, for shell prompts which include the host name, or
for some shells that are too stupid to realize that the prompt string
does not require the host name, to do a DNS query in order to get the
name of the machine they are running on.
I
I wanted to test gigabit network performance and found out that current
(from 5.0 to up to date -current) doesn't fully work with jumbograms (MTU
set to 6000), Intel adapters and nfs (both UDP and TCP).
I checked that the same thing works with 4.9.
I then left one computer at 4.9 and upgraded
Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
Richard Nyberg wrote:
Doug White wrote:
yes, this is a change to -current. It is for your own safety.
I think this change in current is for the worse. I don't see why
I can't manage slices and partitions from my regular OS, but have
to boot up a CD to do
I could have stuck a LONG time on this one if I wasn't testing something
that results in the very thing that causes the panic. I don't have the
exact details, but what I did is the following:
ifconfig fxp0 10.0.2.6/16 (well, that's configured during boot)
route add 10.0.14.247 10.0.2.7
ping
Hi all,
I wonder what is the deeper meaning of the 'stop_cmd=:' in
-CURRENT's /etc/rc.d/pccard. The only consequence I experience is
that '/etc/rc.d/pccard restart' only starts another pccardd.
I would like to settle this before I bother you further with my
PCMCIA problems :-)
Thanks
On Thursday 30 October 2003 01:22 am, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 11:52:48AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote:
+ I'm committing changes to mark various network drivers' interrupt
handlers + MPSAFE. To insure folks have a way to backout if they hit
problems I've also + added a
On Thursday 30 October 2003 07:33 am, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
I could have stuck a LONG time on this one if I wasn't testing something
that results in the very thing that causes the panic. I don't have the
exact details, but what I did is the following:
ifconfig fxp0 10.0.2.6/16 (well, that's
On Thursday 30 October 2003 04:46 am, Michal Mertl wrote:
I wanted to test gigabit network performance and found out that current
(from 5.0 to up to date -current) doesn't fully work with jumbograms (MTU
set to 6000), Intel adapters and nfs (both UDP and TCP).
I checked that the same thing
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Sam Leffler wrote:
On Thursday 30 October 2003 04:46 am, Michal Mertl wrote:
I wanted to test gigabit network performance and found out that current
(from 5.0 to up to date -current) doesn't fully work with jumbograms (MTU
set to 6000), Intel adapters and nfs (both UDP
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:32:46 +0100 (CET), Harti Brandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The c89 utility (which specified a compiler for the C Language specified
by the 108 ISO/IEC 9899: 1990 standard) has been replaced by a c99 utility
(which specifies a compiler for 109 the C Language specified by the
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 08:04:58AM -0800, Sam Leffler wrote:
I've ran many jumbogram tests of machines connected with a cross-over cable
and em devices at each end. If you've got a swtch in the middle make sure it
does the right thing.
Just a minor note: GigE should not require a
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:34:15 -0500, Barney Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Just a minor note: GigE should not require a crossover cable. It's
supposed to work to connect two GigE adapters with a straight-thru
cable. I verified this with two Intel em NICs, quite a while ago.
This should hardly
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 12:48:32PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
As I recall, when I used a crossover cable, I could not get the
adapters to go to 1000, only 100. That might have been the cable,
or not.
That's at least conceivable; I don't know enough about the wire
protocol to tell
I was going to live life dangerously on the bleeding edge for a while,
but it seems I have a problem making it all the way to the edge. ...
Turns out I did not have enough room in /usr, so I got a filesystem
full during make buildkernel. I thought I'd just clean up, then move
/usr/src to another
One of the amd64 machines died with the following. The kernel is a
few weeks old, so this might already be fixed.
Kris
malloc() of 64 with the following non-sleepable locks held:
exclusive sleep mutex mntvnode r = 0 (0x80758220) locked @
I'll me too this one..
Another backtrace with a different call sequence (via ipv6), exact same LOR
lock order reversal
1st 0xc2177c90 rtentry (rtentry) @ /usr/src/sys/net/route.c:182
2nd 0xc206537c radix node head (radix node head) @ /usr/src/sys/net
route.c:544
Stack backtrace:
Soren Schmidt wrote:
It seems Pav Lucistnik wrote:
This patch works for me. Any chance to get it committed?
I'll look at it...
FYI, the issue is still present with yesterday's -current. Will Pav
Lucistnik's patch be committed soon?
Lars
--
Lars Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] USC Information
It seems Lars Eggert wrote:
FYI, the issue is still present with yesterday's -current. Will Pav
Lucistnik's patch be committed soon?
I've already committed a solution that works on all the drives I
could test on (some of which failed before), if this still
fails for you I'd like a more
Soren Schmidt wrote:
It seems Lars Eggert wrote:
FYI, the issue is still present with yesterday's -current. Will Pav
Lucistnik's patch be committed soon?
I've already committed a solution that works on all the drives I
could test on (some of which failed before), if this still
fails for you
Michal Mertl writes:
| On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Sam Leffler wrote:
|
| On Thursday 30 October 2003 04:46 am, Michal Mertl wrote:
| I wanted to test gigabit network performance and found out that current
| (from 5.0 to up to date -current) doesn't fully work with jumbograms (MTU
| set to 6000),
On 30-Oct-2003 Lars Eggert wrote:
Soren Schmidt wrote:
It seems Lars Eggert wrote:
FYI, the issue is still present with yesterday's -current. Will Pav
Lucistnik's patch be committed soon?
I've already committed a solution that works on all the drives I
could test on (some of which
On Thursday 30 October 2003 10:30 am, othermark wrote:
I'll me too this one..
Another backtrace with a different call sequence (via ipv6), exact same LOR
lock order reversal
1st 0xc2177c90 rtentry (rtentry) @ /usr/src/sys/net/route.c:182
2nd 0xc206537c radix node head (radix node head) @
It seems Lars Eggert wrote:
I've already committed a solution that works on all the drives I
could test on (some of which failed before), if this still
fails for you I'd like a more detailed description of what
exactly goes wrong...
I must have missed that commit message, sorry. This
V t, 30. 10. 2003 v 20:43, Lars Eggert pe:
FYI, the issue is still present with yesterday's -current. Will Pav
Lucistnik's patch be committed soon?
I've already committed a solution that works on all the drives I
could test on (some of which failed before), if this still
fails for
Soren Schmidt wrote:
Anyhow if you loose the test for error in atapi-cd.c::acd_tray in the
close case, does it work then ?
If you mean as below, no, that didn't help:
Index: atapi-cd.c
===
RCS file:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 12:07:09PM +0100, Soren Schmidt wrote:
It seems Matt wrote:
I'm now running a kernel/world of October 26th on both NFS client and
server machines. I am still seeing NFS lockups as reported by several
people in these threads:
TB --- 2003-10-30 22:42:22 - tinderbox 2.2 running on cueball.rtp.FreeBSD.org
TB --- 2003-10-30 22:42:22 - starting CURRENT tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2003-10-30 22:42:22 - checking out the source tree
TB --- cd /home/des/tinderbox/CURRENT/ia64/ia64
TB --- /usr/bin/cvs -f -R -q
Does FreeBSD support Software RAID ?
if so, what can it do ?
RAID 0, 1, 5 ??
also would it be able to mirror the root parition ?
Thanks.
any advice would be cool.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
I am running 5-current the last cvs i did 12.30 pm. today CST
failed on buildworld with this.
=== gnu/usr.bin/cvs/doc
makeinfo --no-split -I /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cvs/doc -I
/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cvs/doc/../../../../contrib/cvs/doc
On 2003/10/30 00:16:47, Clive Lin wrote:
On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 02:00:33AM +0800, Clive Lin wrote:
Hi,
I've seen lots of messages on rescent -CURRENT
malloc() of 16 with the following non-sleepable locks held:
exclusive sleep mutex g_xdown r = 0 (0xe044eca8) locked @
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 16:22, Steve Lee wrote:
Does FreeBSD support Software RAID ?
if so, what can it do ?
RAID 0, 1, 5 ??
also would it be able to mirror the root parition ?
Thanks.
any advice would be cool.
http://www.freebsd.org/handbook
There's always good stuff in there about
If you're feeling adventurous and have access to a relatively large
MS-DOS formatted disk that gives a disk too big, sorry error when you
try to mount it, please try out this patch and let me know how it goes:
http://people.freebsd.org/~tjr/fileno32.diff
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 11:52:48AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote:
The following drivers are marked MPSAFE:
ath, em, ep, fxp, sn, wi, sis
I've got changes coming for bge. Other drivers probably can be marked
MPSAFE but I'm only doing it for those drivers that I can test.
Donations@ can
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 10:18:43 -0800
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the amd64 machines died with the following. The kernel is a
few weeks old, so this might already be fixed.
Kris
malloc() of 64 with the following non-sleepable locks held:
exclusive sleep mutex mntvnode r =
So there is no way to mirror the root so if one drive fails,
i can't have the other drive boot up ?
DAMN
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Scott Likens wrote:
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 16:22, Steve Lee wrote:
Does FreeBSD support Software RAID ?
if so, what can it do ?
RAID 0, 1, 5 ??
also would it
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:40:40 -0800 (PST), Steve Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So there is no way to mirror the root so if one drive fails,
i can't have the other drive boot up ?
There are ways to do that, but in order for that to work at all you
need to have BIOS support. Some of the ATA
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Soren Schmidt wrote:
I'm now running a kernel/world of October 26th on both NFS client and
server machines. I am still seeing NFS lockups as reported by several
people in these threads:
Me too!!
Hmm. I'm unable to reproduce this so far, and I'm pounding several
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 05:40:40PM -0800, Steve Lee wrote:
So there is no way to mirror the root so if one drive fails,
i can't have the other drive boot up ?
DAMN
Vinum is capable of doing it, but its a little tricky. Take a look:
Greetings,
I'm having a problem receiving UDP messages over a wi interface:
wi1: Dell TrueMobile 1150 Series PC Card at port 0x180-0x1bf irq 11 function 0
config 1 on pccard0
wi1: 802.11 address: 00:02:2d:4a:d8:7d
wi1: using Lucent Technologies, WaveLAN/IEEE
wi1: Lucent Firmware: Station
Interrupting the normal boot sequence as suggested below has not worked
in the past for this problem.
Inserting debug statements in the source code (as noted in a PR, but I
can't remember which one) in the while (read_intr_count(8) 6) loop
showed that the count value started at 0 and never
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 05:03:38PM -0800, SteAltH FanThoM wrote:
I am running 5-current the last cvs i did 12.30 pm. today CST
failed on buildworld with this.
=== gnu/usr.bin/cvs/doc
makeinfo --no-split -I /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cvs/doc -I
Daniel Eischen wrote:
Greetings,
I'm having a problem receiving UDP messages over a wi interface:
wi1: Dell TrueMobile 1150 Series PC Card at port 0x180-0x1bf irq 11 function 0
config 1 on pccard0
wi1: 802.11 address: 00:02:2d:4a:d8:7d
wi1: using Lucent Technologies, WaveLAN/IEEE
wi1: Lucent
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Lars Eggert wrote:
Daniel Eischen wrote:
Greetings,
I'm having a problem receiving UDP messages over a wi interface:
wi1: Dell TrueMobile 1150 Series PC Card at port 0x180-0x1bf irq 11 function 0
config 1 on pccard0
wi1: 802.11 address: 00:02:2d:4a:d8:7d
yes it does!
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/makeworld.html
21.4.2 Check /etc/make.conf
Examine the files /etc/defaults/make.conf and /etc/make.conf. The first
contains some default defines - most of which are commented out. To make
use of them when you rebuild your
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 08:08:08PM -0800, SteAltH FanThoM wrote:
yes it does!
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/makeworld.html
21.4.2 Check /etc/make.conf
Examine the files /etc/defaults/make.conf and /etc/make.conf. The first
contains some default defines - most
On 29/10/03 18:18 -0800, Nate Lawson wrote:
I looked at a few other ASL copies I have and you have an old version.
Have you done a BIOS update recently?
Yours: OEMID=DELL, OEM Table ID=CPi R, OEM Revision=0x27d0040b,
Others: OEMID=DELL, OEM Table ID=CPi R, OEM Revision=0x27d20b07,
Daniel Eischen wrote:
Could you post a tcpdump for each case? I wonder if this is related to a
fragmentation issue I've seen in the past.
22:46:43.513038 gpz.foo.bar.com.38340 vespa.12345: udp 7393 (frag 52198:[EMAIL
PROTECTED])
22:46:48.522475 gpz.foo.bar.com.38340 vespa.12345: udp 7393 (frag
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Jeremy Bingham wrote:
On 29/10/03 18:18 -0800, Nate Lawson wrote:
I looked at a few other ASL copies I have and you have an old version.
Have you done a BIOS update recently?
Yours: OEMID=DELL, OEM Table ID=CPi R, OEM Revision=0x27d0040b,
Others: OEMID=DELL, OEM
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sam Leffler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: ath, em, ep, fxp, sn, wi, sis
I've been running with ath, fxp, ep, sn and wi w/o problems for a while
now... I juat reconfirmed wi, ep, and sn tonight, but didn't do the
torture testing I did before the ep and sn
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scott Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: To respond to myself, I got ahold of a 4.8 libm.so and made sure that the
: linker used it. No change in the problem, and it still hints that the
: native libc is being linked in.
You might want to enable debugging
61 matches
Mail list logo
