> When I’d try and kill it, there’d be a likely chance that rc > would also get the same Semacquire deadlock. This can also be seen > using broke to try and prune dead dns processes: > > dream% acid 158 > /proc/158/text:arm plan 9 executable > /sys/lib/acid/port > /sys/lib/acid/arm > acid: stk() > semacquire()+0xc /sys/src/libc/9syscall/semacquire.s:6 > lock(l=0x17104)+0x20 /sys/src/libc/port/lock.c:10 > plock()+0x8 /sys/src/libc/port/malloc.c:80 > poolalloc(p=0x18a8c,n=0x10)+0xc /sys/src/libc/port/pool.c:1223 > mallocz(size=0x8,clr=0x1)+0x18 /sys/src/libc/port/malloc.c:221 > Malloc()+0x8 /sys/src/cmd/rc/plan9.c:624 > emalloc(n=0x8)+0x4 /sys/src/cmd/rc/subr.c:9 > newword(wd=0x18e4e,next=0x202d0)+0x8 /sys/src/cmd/rc/exec.c:33 > pushword(wd=0x18e4e)+0x40 /sys/src/cmd/rc/exec.c:44 > execforkexec()+0x34 /sys/src/cmd/rc/havefork.c:223 > Xsimple()+0x170 /sys/src/cmd/rc/simple.c:62 > main(argv=0x5fffff94,argc=0x2)+0x320 /sys/src/cmd/rc/exec.c:184 > _main+0x28 /sys/src/libc/arm/main9.s:19 > acid:
image cache strikes again? - erik
