Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 20:28:46 +0200 From: Marko Zec <zec@icir.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>, Marko Zec <zec@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 119231 for review Message-ID: <200705042028.47360.zec@icir.org> In-Reply-To: <463B762B.1090005@elischer.org> References: <200705041118.l44BIdN0039418@repoman.freebsd.org> <463B762B.1090005@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 04 May 2007 20:06:35 Julian Elischer wrote: > Marko Zec wrote: > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=119231 > > > > Change 119231 by zec@zec_zoo on 2007/05/04 11:18:33 > > > > proc0_init() is called before vi_init() during kernel > > autoconfiguratino / booting, so pointers inside vimage_0 are > > not yet populated at that time. Hence, access vprocg_0 > > directly at that point, not through vimage_0. > > > > Affected files ... > > > > .. //depot/projects/vimage/src/sys/kern/init_main.c#8 edit > > > > Differences ... > > > > ==== //depot/projects/vimage/src/sys/kern/init_main.c#8 (text+ko) > > ==== > > > > @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ > > p->p_ucred->cr_prison = NULL; /* Don't jail it. */ > > #ifdef VIMAGE > > p->p_ucred->cr_vimage = p->p_ucred->cr_rvimage = &vimage_0; > > - vimage_0.v_procg->nprocs = 1; > > + vprocg_0.nprocs = 1; > > #endif > > #ifdef AUDIT > > audit_proc_alloc(p); > > or change the order? Yup... In general I'm always more nervous about changing initialization order than introducing simple changes as above, but vi_init() doesn't (yet) depend on anything particular so yes this should work... Marko
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200705042028.47360.zec>