Re: Remove useless sti in x86 interrupt return path

2011-05-02 Thread Mark Kettenis
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:43:01 +0200 From: Christian Ehrhardt christian_ehrha...@genua.de Hi, On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:00:02PM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote: The sti was introduced in revision 1.97 of locore.s in March 2006 by mickey@. Commit message: | prevent the faults on

Re: Remove useless sti in x86 interrupt return path

2011-05-02 Thread Mark Kettenis
Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 19:21:40 +0200 From: Christian Ehrhardt christian_ehrha...@genua.de Hello Mark, On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 05:42:10PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:43:01 +0200 From: Christian Ehrhardt christian_ehrha...@genua.de Hi, On Mon,

Re: Remove useless sti in x86 interrupt return path

2011-04-19 Thread Christian Ehrhardt
Hi, On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:00:02PM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote: The sti was introduced in revision 1.97 of locore.s in March 2006 by mickey@. Commit message: | prevent the faults on iret to run w/ disabled intrs and cause | deadlocks; niklas toby tom ok Maybe mickey or one of

Remove useless sti in x86 interrupt return path

2011-04-18 Thread Christian Ehrhardt
Hi, we are seeing kernel hangs (hard reset required) under high interrupt load (triggered by ix(4) cards). I've traced this back to an overflow of the kernel stack. This is how the stack looks at the time of the overflow (manual backtrace, as ddb won't show the final part): EBP

Re: Remove useless sti in x86 interrupt return path

2011-04-18 Thread Philip Guenther
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Christian Ehrhardt christian_ehrha...@genua.de wrote: ... Note that the size of the stack frame between Xintr_ioapic1 and pf_pull_hdr is huge (~6k). This area is filled with a 12 byte pattern that looks like a code address, the kernel code segment and a pushed