NetBSD Problem Report #38968

From simonb@thistledown.com.au  Tue Jun 17 05:41:54 2008
Return-Path: <simonb@thistledown.com.au>
Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11])
	by narn.NetBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9727563B842
	for <gnats-bugs@gnats.NetBSD.org>; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:41:54 +0000 (UTC)
Message-Id: <20080617054152.DBBCCAFD04@thoreau.thistledown.com.au>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:41:52 +1000 (EST)
From: Simon Burge <simonb@NetBSD.org>
Reply-To: Simon Burge <simonb@NetBSD.org>
To: gnats-bugs@gnats.NetBSD.org
Subject: assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed at uipc_usrreq.c line 542
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.95

>Number:         38968
>Category:       kern
>Synopsis:       assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed at uipc_usrreq.c line 542
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       high
>Responsible:    ad
>State:          closed
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Tue Jun 17 05:45:00 +0000 2008
>Closed-Date:    Sat Dec 31 23:32:06 +0000 2011
>Last-Modified:  Sat Dec 31 23:32:06 +0000 2011
>Originator:     Simon Burge
>Release:        NetBSD 4.99.64 from 15 June 2008
>Organization:
>Environment:
System: NetBSD 4.99.64 (SNARK) #49: Sun Jun 15 01:31:36 EST 2008 simonb@silmech:/mnt2/src-virgin/sys/arch/amd64/compile/SNARK
Architecture: amd64 (8 cpu)
Machine: amd64
>Description:
	While an 8 CPU amd64 machine was idle, I got this assert:

	    kernel diagnostic assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed:
	       file "../../../../kern/uipc_usrreq.c", line 542
	    db{5}> bt
	    breakpoint() at netbsd:breakpoint+0x5
	    panic() at netbsd:panic+0x260
	    __kernassert() at netbsd:__kernassert+0x2d
	    uipc_usrreq() at netbsd:uipc_usrreq+0x850
	    sosend() at netbsd:sosend+0x506
	    soo_write() at netbsd:soo_write+0x2d
	    dofilewrite() at netbsd:dofilewrite+0x81
	    sys_write() at netbsd:sys_write+0x72
	    syscall() at netbsd:syscall+0x9a

	All other CPUs were in x86_mwait/idle_loop.

>How-To-Repeat:
	No idea I'm afraid - "Leave a machine idle" obviously isn't too
	helpful...

>Fix:
	None given.

>Release-Note:

>Audit-Trail:

Responsible-Changed-From-To: kern-bug-people->ad
Responsible-Changed-By: ad@NetBSD.org
Responsible-Changed-When: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 09:15:35 +0000
Responsible-Changed-Why:
take


State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: ad@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 09:15:35 +0000
State-Changed-Why:
This is likely to be a broken assertion. During connection setup the remote 
end of the socket can briefly be locked by uipc_lock instead of the shared
per-connection lock. It's safe because the thread finishing the connection
setup holds uipc_lock at the time and is not going to send any data down
the pipe, or mess with the connection in any other significant way.


State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->feedback
State-Changed-By: dholland@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 22:03:13 +0000
State-Changed-Why:
Didn't this one get fixed? Or am I thinking of a different solocked
problem?


From: christos@zoulas.com (Christos Zoulas)
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org, ad@NetBSD.org, netbsd-bugs@netbsd.org, 
	gnats-admin@netbsd.org, dholland@NetBSD.org, 
	Simon Burge <simonb@NetBSD.org>
Cc: 
Subject: Re: kern/38968 (assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed at uipc_usrreq.c line 542)
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 17:07:17 -0500

 On Dec 31, 10:03pm, dholland@NetBSD.org (dholland@NetBSD.org) wrote:
 -- Subject: Re: kern/38968 (assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed at uipc_usr

 | Synopsis: assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed at uipc_usrreq.c line 542
 | 
 | State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->feedback
 | State-Changed-By: dholland@NetBSD.org
 | State-Changed-When: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 22:03:13 +0000
 | State-Changed-Why:
 | Didn't this one get fixed? Or am I thinking of a different solocked
 | problem?

 I would close it, this code is completely different now.

 christos

From: Simon Burge <simonb@NetBSD.org>
To: christos@zoulas.com (Christos Zoulas)
Cc: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org, ad@NetBSD.org, netbsd-bugs@netbsd.org,
    gnats-admin@netbsd.org, dholland@NetBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/38968 (assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed at uipc_usrreq.c line 542)
Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2012 10:16:03 +1100

 Christos Zoulas wrote:

 > On Dec 31, 10:03pm, dholland@NetBSD.org (dholland@NetBSD.org) wrote:
 > -- Subject: Re: kern/38968 (assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed at uipc_usr
 > 
 > | Synopsis: assertion "solocked2(so, so2)" failed at uipc_usrreq.c line 542
 > | 
 > | State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->feedback
 > | State-Changed-By: dholland@NetBSD.org
 > | State-Changed-When: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 22:03:13 +0000
 > | State-Changed-Why:
 > | Didn't this one get fixed? Or am I thinking of a different solocked
 > | problem?
 > 
 > I would close it, this code is completely different now.

 As I said in the PR, I don't know how to reproduce this problem.  I have
 no problems with closing the PR, especially if Christos says the code is
 different now.

 Cheers,
 Simon.

State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed
State-Changed-By: dholland@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 23:32:06 +0000
State-Changed-Why:
Let's close it then.


>Unformatted:

Home	PR Database Search