from erik quanstros 9fans post:
i think the list insertion code needs a single-read
test that f->alarm != 0. to prevent the 0 from
acting like a fencepost. e.g. trying to insert -10 into
list -40 -30 0 -20.
if(alarms.head) {
l = &alarms.head;
for(f = *l; f; f = f->palarm) {
>> fw = f->alarm;
>> if(fw != 0 && (long)(fw - when) >= 0) {
up->palarm = f;
*l = up;
goto done;
}
l = &f->palarm;
}
*l = up;
}
when alarmkproc is commited to send the alarm note to the process,
the process might have exited already, or worse, being reused for
another process. pexit() zeros p->alarm at the beginning, but the
kalarmproc() might read p->alarm before pexit() zeroed it, decide
to send the note, then get preempted and pexit() releases the proc.
once kalarmproc() is resumed, the proc might be already something
different and we send the note to the wrong thing.
we now check p->alarm under the debug qlock. that way, pexit()
cannot make progress while we test the condition.
remove the error label arround postnote(). postnote does not raise
error.
catch the error() that can be thrown by sleep() and tsleep()
in kprocs.
add missing pexit() calls.
always set the freemem argument to pexit() from kproc otherwise
the process gets added to the broken list.
