Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2017 13:43:36 +0100 From: Oliver Pinter <oliver.pinter@hardenedbsd.org> To: "Morris, Don" <Don.Morris@dell.com> Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r325285 - head/sys/amd64/amd64 Message-ID: <CAPQ4ffv9eFEULOammg=CPi6UtWfiBbqybMHnk258kbKSw%2BF19g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <30042B831BE3AF428BC874A8B81B08E989BFC9ED@MX104CL02.corp.emc.com> References: <30042B831BE3AF428BC874A8B81B08E989BFC9ED@MX104CL02.corp.emc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/3/17, Morris, Don <Don.Morris@dell.com> wrote:
>> Modified: head/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- head/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c Wed Nov 1 16:32:11 2017 (r325284)
>> +++ head/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c Wed Nov 1 18:06:44 2017 (r325285)
>> @@ -2892,8 +2892,8 @@ reclaim_pv_chunk_leave_pmap(pmap_t pmap, pmap_t
>> locked
> > static vm_page_t
> > reclaim_pv_chunk(pmap_t locked_pmap, struct rwlock **lockp)
> > {
>> - struct pv_chunk *pc, *pc_marker;
>> - struct pv_chunk_header pc_marker_b;
>> + struct pv_chunk *pc, *pc_marker, *pc_marker_end;
>> + struct pv_chunk_header pc_marker_b, pc_marker_end_b;
>> struct md_page *pvh;
>> pd_entry_t *pde;
>> pmap_t next_pmap, pmap;
>> @@ -2906,6 +2906,7 @@ reclaim_pv_chunk(pmap_t locked_pmap, struct rwlock
>> **l
>> uint64_t inuse;
>> int bit, field, freed;
>> bool start_di;
>> + static int active_reclaims = 0;
>>
>> PMAP_LOCK_ASSERT(locked_pmap, MA_OWNED);
>> KASSERT(lockp != NULL, ("reclaim_pv_chunk: lockp is NULL"));
>> @@ -2914,7 +2915,9 @@ reclaim_pv_chunk(pmap_t locked_pmap, struct rwlock
>> **l
>> PG_G = PG_A = PG_M = PG_RW = 0;
>> SLIST_INIT(&free);
>> bzero(&pc_marker_b, sizeof(pc_marker_b));
>> + bzero(&pc_marker_end, sizeof(pc_marker_end));
>> pc_marker = (struct pv_chunk *)&pc_marker_b;
>> + pc_marker_end = (struct pv_chunk *)&pc_marker_end_b;
>
> Shouldn't the additional bzero here be of pc_marker_end_b, not
> pc_marker_end? Minor bug -- but just saying...
Sure, sizeof(pointer) returns 8 (on amd64) instead of sizeof(struct).
>
> Don Morris
> (Statements are not those of my employer, etc, etc...)
> _______________________________________________
> svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPQ4ffv9eFEULOammg=CPi6UtWfiBbqybMHnk258kbKSw%2BF19g>