Re: nvidia kld panic with debug kernel

John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 September 2005 05:28 pm, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
> 
>>Am Mittwoch, 21. September 2005 22:51 CEST schrieb John Baldwin:
>>
>>>On Tuesday 20 September 2005 03:41 pm, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I get the following panic when using the nvidia driver with a debug
>>>>kernel, when I disable INVARIANTS and WITNESS everything is working
>>>>fine!
>>>>
>>>>Here's the trace:
>>>>
>>>>ACPI APIC Table: <D815EA EA81510A>
>>>>ioapic0: Changing APIC ID to 1
>>>>ioapic0 <Version 2.0> irqs 0-23 on motherboard
>>>>panic: spin lock rm.mutex_mtx not in order list
>>>
>>>You need to add an entry for "rm.mutex_mtx" to the static spin lock
>>>order list in sys/kern/subr_witness.c.  Something like this:
>>>
>>>Index: subr_witness.c
>>>===================================================================
>>>RCS file: /usr/cvs/src/sys/kern/subr_witness.c,v
>>>retrieving revision 1.201
>>>diff -u -r1.201 subr_witness.c
>>>--- subr_witness.c      15 Sep 2005 19:07:14 -0000      1.201
>>>+++ subr_witness.c      21 Sep 2005 20:50:45 -0000
>>>_at__at_ -363,6 +363,7 _at__at_
>>> #ifdef SMP
>>>        { "ap boot", &lock_class_mtx_spin },
>>> #endif
>>>+       { "rm.mutex_mtx", &lock_class_mtx_spin },
>>>        { "sio", &lock_class_mtx_spin },
>>> #ifdef __i386__
>>>        { "cy", &lock_class_mtx_spin },
>>
>>Thanks for your attention! I don't exactly know what this does and why I
>>should add this spinlock exclude, I posted this error because somewhere
>>between early BETA4 and late BETA4 I could run the nvidia driver with
>>debug kernels without this panic. Short before BETA5 this changed back to
>>the panic I've already seen before BETA4, so I posted it here.
>>If it is something harmless it's safe to ignore my post, if it's something
>>which reflects a bug I hope I could help.
> 
> 
> It has to do with the WITNESS kernel option.  WITNESS has to be explicitly 
> told about each spin mutex in the kernel.

Would having this in the base adversely affect those who don't use the 
driver? In other words, is there any reason not to just add this?

Doug

-- 

     This .signature sanitized for your protection