On 18-Mar-2002 Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020318 10:24] wrote:
>>
>> On 17-Mar-2002 Robert Watson wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>> >
>> >> * Munehiro Matsuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 06:36] wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > PS. I got
* John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020318 10:24] wrote:
>
> On 17-Mar-2002 Robert Watson wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >
> >> * Munehiro Matsuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 06:36] wrote:
> >> >
> >> > PS. I got another message that happend when I ^C'ed a buildw
On 17-Mar-2002 Robert Watson wrote:
>
> On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
>> * Munehiro Matsuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 06:36] wrote:
>> >
>> > PS. I got another message that happend when I ^C'ed a buildworld earlier,
>> > with same kernel. May be it should go to Alfred Perls
Apparently, On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 09:17:22AM -0800,
Alfred Perlstein said words to the effect of;
> * Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 09:08] wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >
> > > * Munehiro Matsuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 06:36] wrote:
> >
* Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 09:08] wrote:
>
> On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> > * Munehiro Matsuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 06:36] wrote:
> > >
> > > PS. I got another message that happend when I ^C'ed a buildworld earlier,
> > > with same kernel. May be it
On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * Munehiro Matsuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 06:36] wrote:
> >
> > PS. I got another message that happend when I ^C'ed a buildworld earlier,
> > with same kernel. May be it should go to Alfred Perlstein?
> >
> > lock order reversal
> > 1st 0xc
* Munehiro Matsuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020317 06:36] wrote:
>
> PS. I got another message that happend when I ^C'ed a buildworld earlier,
> with same kernel. May be it should go to Alfred Perlstein?
>
> lock order reversal
> 1st 0xc198eec0 pipe mutex @ ../../../kern/sys_pipe.c:779
> 2nd 0xc0
From: Seigo Tanimura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 01:17:21 +0900
::Seigo> On Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:22:22 +0100,
::Seigo> Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
::
::Seigo> Poul-Henning> acquiring duplicate lock of same type: "thrd_sleep"
::Seigo> Poul-Henning> 1st @ ../../../vm
> Although I am still getting the following lock problems when I shut
> the system down:
>
> lock order reversal
> 1st 0xc036afc0 allproc @ ../../../kern/vfs_syscalls.c:452
> 2nd 0xc7ecce34 filedesc structure @ ../../../kern/vfs_syscalls.c:457
I've been seeing this since Feb 4.
Bill
To Uns
I've seen this as well, -current from about 5 days ago, dual proc 1.4GHz
K7 A7M266D with a 13GB IBM UDMA66 drive, GENERIC kernel + hints.
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote:
> --- Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >I haven't seen this. I built a kernel today, and I have a du
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002 22:56:58 +0900,
Seigo Tanimura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Seigo> On Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:22:22 +0100,
Seigo> Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Seigo> Poul-Henning> acquiring duplicate lock of same type: "thrd_sleep"
Seigo> Poul-Henning> 1st @ ../../../vm/vm_map.c
> The patch attached below renames the lock of the kernel_map to
> "kernel_map" once witness gets ready to run. This eliminated all of
> the lock order reversals on my PC.
I will check it out. I will check this out on my dual-processor machine.
Thanks for the patch. :-)
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> I get this one on every single boot. We're not shipping the snapshot
> with that in place, right ?
I assume this is from Brian's recent VM locking commit. Currently, it's
on the list of commits to back out of the DP1 branch, assuming the issues
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:22:22 +0100,
Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Poul-Henning> acquiring duplicate lock of same type: "thrd_sleep"
Poul-Henning> 1st @ ../../../vm/vm_map.c:2288
Poul-Henning> 2nd @ ../../../vm/vm_kern.c:172
(snip)
Poul-Henning> _vm_map_lock(c038afb4,c02f8440,ac,
--- Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I haven't seen this. I built a kernel today, and I have a dual processor
> >machine. Are you using any special kernel options, such as VFS_BIO_DEBUG
> >or something, or am I talking nuts? :)
>
> Well, I have. On a single CPU net-booting -curr
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Hiten Pandya w
rites:
>I haven't seen this. I built a kernel today, and I have a dual processor
>machine. Are you using any special kernel options, such as VFS_BIO_DEBUG
>or something, or am I talking nuts? :)
Well, I have. On a single CPU net-booting -current.
--- Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I get this one on every single boot. We're not shipping the snapshot
> with that in place, right ?
>
> real memory = 268423168 (262132K bytes)
> avail memory = 257003520 (250980K bytes)
> acquiring duplicate lock of same type: "thrd_sleep"
> 1
17 matches
Mail list logo
