> From: Mike Belopuhov <m...@belopuhov.com> > Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 13:53:56 +0200 > > On 8 May 2015 at 12:37, Martin Pieuchot <m...@openbsd.org> wrote: > > On 07/05/15(Thu) 20:58, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > >> As I've pointed out before, on panic we can be running on any > >> CPU and our disk controller's interrupts can interrupt on the > >> other one. Since we'll most likely be holding a kernel lock, > >> dealing with unlocking it might get hairy very fast. Instead > >> what we could do to improve the chances of a clean shutdown on > >> panic is to instruct our disk subsystem to do polled I/O that > >> will be run on the same CPU with the panic. > > > > Did you consider executing ddb's boot commands on cpu0? I mean doing > > an implicit "machine ddbcpu 0" before executing any "boot" command? > > > > But panic can't do it really.
And not all our architectures support the "machine ddbcpu" command.
