Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 21:04:15 -0400 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> Cc: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: panic: mutex vm not owned Message-ID: <20010521210415.K17514@superconductor.rush.net> In-Reply-To: <20010522000139.35B763E0B@bazooka.unixfreak.org>; from dima@unixfreak.org on Mon, May 21, 2001 at 05:01:39PM -0700 References: <20010521213714.A54189@walton.maths.tcd.ie> <20010522000139.35B763E0B@bazooka.unixfreak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> [010521 20:02] wrote: > David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> writes: > > On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 01:44:16AM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote: > > > > > exit1 calls shmexit with vm_mtx held on line 228 of kern_exit.c > > > (rev. 1.127). Actually, shmexit_myhook should always be called with > > > vm_mtx held, so shm_delete_mapping can't assume it isn't held. > > > > The following seems to work. It's basically your patch, but it > > removes the patch which was originally committed, adds an extra > > assert, expands on one comment and grabs a mutex in one place > > it seemed to be needed after removing the others. > > Great! I can confirm that this works for me. Alfred, any objections > to me or David committing this? I'd like to see the issues cleared up asap, if you have a delta please go ahead and commit it, just make sure you toss me a headsup about it either pre- or post- patch. Thanks for taking the time to do this. -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010521210415.K17514>