From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@9fans.net Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:20:33 +0100 From: cinap_lenrek@gmx.de In-Reply-To: <20101118081130.GA3464@fangle.proxima.alt.za> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-wrfqpafnrnzrpfnxowyrypuywo" Subject: Re: [9fans] That deadlock, again Topicbox-Message-UUID: 846cfb34-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-wrfqpafnrnzrpfnxowyrypuywo Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hm... thinking about it... does the kernel assume (maybe in early initialization) that calling qlock() without a proc is ok as long as it can make sure it will not be held by another proc? -- cinap --upas-wrfqpafnrnzrpfnxowyrypuywo Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <9fans-bounces+cinap_lenrek=gmx.de@9fans.net> Delivered-To: GMX delivery to cinap_lenrek@gmx.de Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2010 08:15:39 -0000 Received: from gouda.swtch.com (EHLO gouda.swtch.com) [67.207.142.3] by mx0.gmx.net (mx028) with SMTP; 18 Nov 2010 09:15:39 +0100 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=gouda.swtch.com) by gouda.swtch.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <9fans-bounces@9fans.net>) id 1PIzcE-0008Uc-Rn; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:13:10 +0000 Received: from [192.96.32.140] (helo=mumble.proxima.alt.za) by gouda.swtch.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PIzcA-0008UE-FP for 9fans@9fans.net; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:13:08 +0000 Received: from fangle.proxima.alt.za ([41.119.171.196]) (authenticated bits=0) by mumble.proxima.alt.za (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oAI8BhOK027590 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <9fans@9fans.net>; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:11:47 +0200 (SAST) Received: from fangle.proxima.alt.za (fangle.proxima.alt.za [127.0.0.1]) by fangle.proxima.alt.za (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id oAI8BXts003497 for <9fans@9fans.net>; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:11:33 +0200 Received: (from lucio@localhost) by fangle.proxima.alt.za (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id oAI8BUq9003495 for 9fans@9fans.net; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:11:30 +0200 Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:11:30 +0200 From: Lucio De Re To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <20101118081130.GA3464@fangle.proxima.alt.za> Mail-Followup-To: lucio@proxima.alt.za, Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> References: <215c4028dc0c6d0cdcda7fd23830bc70@proxima.alt.za> <0aabdaf4b9cdf3f0334b1e4fc018d676@plug.quanstro.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0aabdaf4b9cdf3f0334b1e4fc018d676@plug.quanstro.net> Organization: Proxima Research & Development User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (mumble.proxima.alt.za [192.96.32.140]); Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:11:47 +0200 (SAST) Subject: Re: [9fans] That deadlock, again X-BeenThere: 9fans@9fans.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.10 Precedence: list Reply-To: lucio@proxima.alt.za, Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.9fans.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: 9fans-bounces@9fans.net Errors-To: 9fans-bounces+cinap_lenrek=gmx.de@9fans.net X-GMX-Antivirus: 0 (no virus found) X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (Mail was not recognized as spam); Detail=5D7Q89H36p77e5KAPs1l6v/Sb97LojnDtMgfETrECMLUO9erHzOJe+OynZRhvlGqb5A0X bbiCt2rAnnct/NAlbHMvoAL6GY+23tB3khNK7avqRsgMMVBwlWgrgcyEiCy6eQ7DbfhonniFyqTI PpJNA==V1; On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:53:52AM -0500, erik quanstrom wrote: > > you must be in process context to qlock, because only > processes can sleep. > There's obviously at least one exception, because otherwise I would not have got a panic at startup. Or, for that matter there would not be active code ahead of the /sys/src/9/port/qlock.c:35,36 if(up == 0) panic("qlock"); in qlock(). Or maybe that's where things are going wrong, but I doubt that the code is mistaken, I know my understanding is inadequate :-) ++L --upas-wrfqpafnrnzrpfnxowyrypuywo--