Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-18 Thread Garrett Wollman
lock order reversal 1st 0xd3a5c11c process lock @ ../../../vm/vm_glue.c:469 2nd 0xc0e3fe30 lockmgr interlock @ ../../../kern/kern_lock.c:239 This is on relatively old (~ three months) sources. The first lock is from swapout_procs(); I assume the second lock actually refers to the call to lockm

RE: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-18 Thread John Baldwin
On 18-Sep-01 Garrett Wollman wrote: > lock order reversal > 1st 0xd3a5c11c process lock @ ../../../vm/vm_glue.c:469 > 2nd 0xc0e3fe30 lockmgr interlock @ ../../../kern/kern_lock.c:239 > > This is on relatively old (~ three months) sources. The first lock is > from swapout_procs(); I assume the

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-19 Thread Wilko Bulte
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 03:01:25PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 18-Sep-01 Garrett Wollman wrote: > > lock order reversal > > 1st 0xd3a5c11c process lock @ ../../../vm/vm_glue.c:469 > > 2nd 0xc0e3fe30 lockmgr interlock @ ../../../kern/kern_lock.c:239 > > > > This is on relatively old (~ th

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-19 Thread John Baldwin
On 19-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 03:01:25PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: >> >> On 18-Sep-01 Garrett Wollman wrote: >> > lock order reversal >> > 1st 0xd3a5c11c process lock @ ../../../vm/vm_glue.c:469 >> > 2nd 0xc0e3fe30 lockmgr interlock @ ../../../kern/kern_lock.c:239

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-23 Thread David O'Brien
On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 08:49:29PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > Is there any reason to assume that specifying CPUTYPE ev56 has any > influence on the lock order reversal? No that I know of. I used to run a -CURRENT DS20 with CPUTYPE=ev56. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsu

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-24 Thread John Baldwin
On 23-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 07:40:52PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: >> > >> > On 19-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: >> > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 03:01:25PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: >> >> ... >> >> > >> p_

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-25 Thread Bruce Evans
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Wilko Bulte wrote: > I did notice that the default Alpha beep is of a much higher frequency > than the x86 one. Any relation? (long shot... I suppose) This bug is well known (including by your mailbox). From mail sent to your mailbox: % From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 18 17

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-25 Thread Bruce Evans
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, John Baldwin wrote: > Hmm, that first one is in sysbeep() (the clk one) Ah! > > if (!beeping) { > /* enable counter2 output to speaker */ > if (pitch) outb(IO_PPI, inb(IO_PPI) | 3); > beeping = period; >

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-23 Thread Wilko Bulte
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 07:40:52PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > On 19-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 03:01:25PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > ... > > > >> p_flag to p_sflag which changed its locking s

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-20 Thread Wilko Bulte
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 19-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 03:01:25PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: ... > >> p_flag to p_sflag which changed its locking semantics.) > > > > Another one, on a -current from yesterday, on -alpha: > >

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-24 Thread Wilko Bulte
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:33:32PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 23-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 07:40:52PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > >> > > >> > On 19-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: > >> > > On Tue, Sep

Re: Seen this lock order reversal?

2001-09-24 Thread Wilko Bulte
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:33:32PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 23-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 07:40:52PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > >> > > >> > On 19-Sep-01 Wilko Bulte wrote: > >> > > On Tue, Sep