On 12/30/15 6:25 AM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 05:54:07AM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote: >> Found this on both my build machine and my laptop, each of which just >> built head _at_r292914 (while running r292864 during the build) -- e.g.: >> >> FreeBSD g1-252.catwhisker.org 11.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #287 r292864M/292864:1100092: Tue Dec 29 05:01:42 PST 2015 root_at_g1-252.catwhisker.org:/common/S4/obj/usr/src/sys/CANARY amd64 >> >> Unfortunately, the panic occurs early enough that I can't get a crash >> dump (I'm don't think the swap device has yet been discovered), and >> serial console isn't working for my build machine. >> >> I took some screen shots of the laptop, but I don't seem to be able >> to connect the phone to the laptop in a way to allow data interchange, >> so I'll try to hand-transcribe the more obviously-relevant bits: >> >> ... >> SMP: AP CPU #5 Launched! >> kernel trap 9 with interrupts disabled >> >> Fatal trap 9: general protection fault while in kernel mode >> cpuid = 6; apic id = 86 >> instruction pointer = 0x28:0xffffffff80d9b505 >> stack pointer = 0x28:0xfffffe06015ca8f0 >> frame pointer = 0x28:0xfffffe06015ca950 >> code segment = base 0x0, limit 0xfffff, type 0x1b >> = DPL 0, pres 1, long 1, def32 0, gran 1 >> processor eflags = resume, IOPL = 0 >> current process = 11 (idle: cpu6) >> [ thread pid 11 tid 100010 ] >> Stopped at 0xffffffff80d9b505 = ld_ldt: lldt %ax >> db> bt >> Tracing pid 11 tid 100010 td 0xfffff800067f69a0 >> ld_ldt() at 0xffffffff80d9b505 = ld_ldt/frame 0xfffffe06015ca900 >> sched_switch() at 0xffffffff80a176c5 = sched_switch+0x495/frame 0xfffffe06015ca950 >> mi_switch() at 0xffffffff809f8759 = mi_switch+0x169/frame 0xfffffe06015ca980 >> sched_idletd() at 0xffffffff80a1a211 = sched_idletd+0x391/frame 0xfffffe06015caa70 >> fork_exit() at 0xffffffff809b5324 = fork_exit+0x84/frame 0xfffffe06015aab0 >> fork_trampoline() at 0xffffffff80d9eade = fork_trampoline+0xe/frame 0xfffffe06015caab0 >> --- trap 0, rip = 0, rsp = 0, rpb = 0 --- >> db> >> >> I'm happy to try testing, but as I actually use the laptop for >> day-to-day activities, I'm likely to need to do some priority-shifting. >> > > Try clean build first. struct proc layout was changed recently, and the > instruction at ld_ldt would fault if using the wrong offsets. r294105 fixes this. It was a FAST_DEPEND bug. -- Regards, Bryan DreweryReceived on Fri Jan 15 2016 - 21:10:21 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:02 UTC