Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea...

From: Julian Elischer (julian_at_elischer.org)
Date: 07/21/04

  • Next message: Doug Rabson: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..." 
    Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 00:06:37 -0700
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>

    Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

    >In message <20040720203739.GA72252@VARK.homeunix.com>, David Schultz writes:
    >
    >
    >
    >>>Looking for sleep addresses inside the module might make sense too.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>But this is just a heuristic that may sometimes fail. The module
    >>might be holding resources or locks, it could have callbacks, etc.
    >>If we're going to offer a forcible unload option, [...]
    >>
    >>
    >
    >This has _nothing_ to do with forcible unload.
    >
    >Please read the subject, again if necessary.
    >
    >This is an idea for a debug tool which may help people properly
    >debug and implement unload *in general*.
    >

    as such, speed wouldnot be crucial, so having an alterred version of the
    stack trace code
    that walks all available stacks looking for matching addresses would be
    quite a reasonable thingto do.

    >
    >
    >

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

  • Next message: Doug Rabson: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
    • Quantcast