Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 Jun 2001 14:01:29 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.org, alfred@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   RE: alpha pmap corruption continues
Message-ID:  <15144.64505.439116.166985@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.010614104807.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <15144.55776.3763.28141@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <XFMail.010614104807.jhb@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

John Baldwin writes:
 > 
 > On 14-Jun-01 Andrew Gallatin wrote:
 > > 
 > > fatal kernel trap:
 > > 
 > >     trap entry     = 0x2 (memory management fault)
 > >     cpuid          = 0
 > >     faulting va    = 0xfffffffe00480210
 > 
 > Interesting faulting address.  This is in K0SEG isn't it? :(

No, K0SEG goes from 0xfffffc0000000000LL to 0xfffffdffffffffffLL 
Anything with a 0xf..ffe00... is mapped (kernel) memory.

<...>
 > In vm_fault() we check to see if we already own the vm_mtx to prevent recursing
 > on it.  Look at the hadvmlock variable in vm_fault().  That means, though, that
 > it shouldn't be reporting vm_map.c as it's last acquired line though. :(  Oh.
 > This is due to interlock ugliness.   When we grab a vm_map lock, we temporarily
 > release the vm lock during the lock acquisition adn then reacquire it.

So, what are the odds that there's a race somewhere in this releasing &
reacquireing?  We used to be at splvm throughout this code, right?
Is this at a point where we used to sleep (or otherwise drop to ipl0?),
or is this a new opportunity for a race?

Drew

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15144.64505.439116.166985>