Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peter Wemm writes: > >As you said, _sleeping_ is the problem. M_WAITOK means "you may sleep if > >you like". ie: it is a time bomb waiting for the right low memory condition > >which will then explode with a 100% authentic crash or lock up. > > > >Pretend it said M_SLEEPOK instead of M_WAITOK. > > Uhm, I'm actually seeing the opposite behaviour as well: after I > changed the md(4) driver to use M_NOWAIT I still see malloc/zalloc > sleeping...
I'm with Poul on this one, Peter: M_WAITOK doesn't mean what you think it means: it's doesn't mean tsleep may be called, and M_NOWAIT doesn't mean tsleep() _won't_ be called, in practice. It's either incredibly badly named, or it's incredibly badly implemented -- I would argue the latter, actually, since even if it's completely orthogonal, you're screwed because it means you have two call conversion systems, without a WITNESS intersection to detect deadly embraces. 8-(. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
