Re: Sleeping thread (tid 100033, pid 16): panic in FreeBSD

On Tue, 20 Dec 2011, Attilio Rao wrote:

> As we are here, however, I have a question for Robert here: do you think we 
> should support the _ddb() variant of options even in the case DDB is not 
> enabled in the kernel?

It's possible that _ddb() should be spelled _unlocked(), or perhaps _debug(), 
but neither really suggests what the name should actually imply: using it is 
safe only in a marginal (debugging) sense, and not in a production code sense. 
One might also reasonable call them stack_foo_dontusethis().

The _ddb() variants are used in at least two not strictly DDB cases: redzone 
support, and Solaris memory allocation.  And, I guess, the current lock 
debugging case that we're talking about now, but I'm not sure if those 
debugging features specifically require DDB in the kernel themselves?

Robert
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"