I opened PR210641 to track this after I hit it on i386 during the sys/kqueue/kqueue_test:main ATF test. I hit the panic two times in 9 tries. -Alan On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Matthew Macy <mmacy_at_nextbsd.org> wrote: > > > > ---- On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 10:45:24 -0700 Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel_at_gmail.com> wrote ---- > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:39:42AM -0700, Matthew Macy wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can use dwarf4 if you use GDB from ports > > How would it help ? > > The following statement to a native speaker would imply that GDB is the problem: "There is not much gdb info here; I'll try to rebuild kgdb." > > If in fact %rip has been smashed that's a bit like saying "the light doesn't show anything on the table, I'll replace the light bulb" - when in fact there isn't anything on the table. > > > Problem for kgdb is that %rip is zero, due to function pointer being set > > to NULL in a destroyed knlist. Either version of kgdb would not find > > neither code nor unwind annotations for zero address. > > > > But the issue is understood and > > Yes. Since the initial e-mail. > > >> we are working on the version of fix. > > I'm glad you're on it. > > -M > > > > > > > ---- On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 04:50:00 -0700 Peter Holm<peter_at_holm.cc> wrote ----On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:26:14PM -0500, Eric Badger wrote: > > I believe they all have more or less the same cause. The crashes occur > > because we acquire a knlist lock via the KN_LIST_LOCK macro, but when we > > call KN_LIST_UNLOCK, the knote???s knlist reference (kn->kn_knlist) has > > been cleared by another thread. Thus we are unable to unlock the > > previously acquired lock and hold it until something causes us to crash > > (such as the witness code noticing that we???re returning to userland with > > the lock still held). > ... > > I believe there???s also a small window where the KN_LIST_LOCK macro > > checks kn->kn_knlist and finds it to be non-NULL, but by the time it > > actually dereferences it, it has become NULL. This would produce the > > ???page fault while in kernel mode??? crash. > > > > If someone fami > liar with this code sees an obvious fix, I???ll be happy to > > test it. Otherwise, I???d appreciate any advice on fixing this. My first > > thought is that a ???struct knote??? ought to have its own mutex for > > controlling access to the flag fields and ideally the ???kn_knlist??? field. > > I.e., you would first acquire a knote???s lock and then the knlist lock, > > thus ensuring that no one could clear the kn_knlist variable while you > > hold the knlist lock. The knlist lock, however, usually comes from > > whichever event producing entity the knote tracks, so getting lock > > ordering right between the per-knote mutex and this other lock seems > > potentially hard. (Sometimes we call into functions in kern_event.c with > > the knlist lock already held, having been acquired in code outside of > > kern_event.c. Consider, for example, calling KNOTE_LOCKED from > > kern_exit.c; the PROC_LOCK macro has already been used to acquire the > > process lock, also serving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"Received on Mon Jun 27 2016 - 19:00:04 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:06 UTC