Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 09:36:47 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@casselton.net> To: l.ertl@univie.ac.at, tinguely@casselton.net Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Another pmap related panic Message-ID: <200308261436.h7QEal0s076246@casselton.net> In-Reply-To: <20030826160918.P29045@pcle2.cc.univie.ac.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thank-you, The fact that pmap_pte_quick() panics on the untrue mutex should indicate that it is possible that 2 processors may enter pmap_pte_quick() at the same time and therefore it is possible to have the one processor invalidate the VA/PA mapping using PADDR1/PMAP1. If that is true then the first processor should trap/panic when dereferencing the VA address. If the above is true, a PADDR1 mutex could be added, or use a seperate PADDR/PMAP per processor. Looks like there is already mutex for the copy maps. Did you want me to work up a test PADDR mutex? --Mark.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200308261436.h7QEal0s076246>