Project

General

Profile

Actions

Bug #2148

closed

DFBSD v2.13.0.38.g09a36 - Switch to TTY panic

Added by tuxillo over 12 years ago. Updated over 12 years ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
-
Target version:
-
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:

Description

Hi,

Panic when switching to other tty (Alt+Fx):

panic: lockmgr kbdmux from /home/source/dfbsd/sys/dev/misc/kbd/kbdsw.c:199:
called with 1 spinlocks held
cpuid = 3
Trace beginning at frame 0xffffffe05ba746e8
panic() at panic+0x1ed
panic() at panic+0x1ed
debuglockmgr() at debuglockmgr+0xab
kbd_ioctl() at kbd_ioctl+0x62
save_kbd_state() at save_kbd_state+0x22
exchange_scr() at exchange_scr+0x4e
sc_switch_scr() at sc_switch_scr+0x38f
scioctl() at scioctl+0xcfc
dev_dioctl() at dev_dioctl+0x56
devfs_fo_ioctl() at devfs_fo_ioctl+0x125
fo_ioctl() at fo_ioctl+0x46
mapped_ioctl() at mapped_ioctl+0x498
sys_ioctl() at sys_ioctl+0x1c
syscallpending() at 0x47f1d8
gd_ipending() at 0x42a6be
gd_ipending() at

No coredump no nothing, trying to get some more info right now.

Cheers,
Antonio Huete

Actions #1

Updated by sjg over 12 years ago

<@tuxillo> I still don't understand why sc_switch_scr() needs to be called locked
<@thesjg_> for accesses to sc probably
<@tuxillo> thesjg_: so that the values that it checks doesn't change in the mean time?=
<@tuxillo> like saying, instead of locking/unlocking in a bunch of places inside sc_switch_scr(), I rather
lock the whole thing
<@thesjg_> if that's the case.. you can't unlock until around save_kbd_state() in exchange_scr(), but i'm
not sure its protecting that
<@tuxillo> is that right?
<@thesjg_> not even then
<@thesjg_> you need to figure out what the lock is protecting for sure
<@thesjg_> then you can figure out what to do about it
<@tuxillo> yah true
<@tuxillo> thesjg_: gonna see where it is used to try to find out why
<@thesjg_> it certainly looks like its protecting accesses to the softc
<@thesjg_> yeah, it is
<@tuxillo> hmm
<@thesjg_> so, you need to call kbd_ioctl() without the lock held, but you have two problems there
<@thesjg_> save_kbd_state() (maybe update_kbd_state() too) is called with the lock held sometimes, you know
that, but you can't just unlock unconditionally until you confirm that it is always called with the lock
held
<@thesjg_> if its sometimes called with the lock held, sometimes not, you have to sort that out
<@thesjg_> also, it passes an argument contained in the protected softc into the ioctl, you need to sort
that out
<aggelos> thesjg_: back to the freebsd 5.x days? :P
<@thesjg_> (make a copy of that member of the softc structure, call the ioctl, copy it back into the
structure after you re-acquire the lock on return?)
<@thesjg_> aggelos: looks that way
<@thesjg_> i'm not sure if the ioctl modifies the arg or just needs it for reference, so you'll have to
figure that out
<@thesjg_> tuxillo: armed that with info, you should be able to come up with a fix w/o too much pain
<aggelos> ok, time to reboot into kubuntu 11.10 :/
<@thesjg_> can't help, must sleep :)

^-- for posterity

Actions #2

Updated by tuxillo over 12 years ago

From what I've seen in the syscons code, save_kbd_state() and update_kbd_state()
are never called with the lock held.

Furthermore, in the console path functions, specifically in sccnputc() I've
found this:

scp->status &= ~SLKED;
#if 0
/* This can block, illegal in the console path */
update_kbd_state(scp, scp->status, SLKED);
#endif
Actions #3

Updated by tuxillo over 12 years ago

Sam,

As you already know what's passed to the ioctl is struct keyboard kbd from the
softc.

For both atkbd and ukbd that struct's private data (kb_data) is modified. One
thing to note is that for both the ioctl function is entirely under a critical
section.

Cheers,
Antonio Huete

Actions #4

Updated by tuxillo over 12 years ago

Fixed in f6ce8b1945431efc69d4d9b9b02f73af98edbe53

Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF