Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 15:56:09 -0400 From: Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com> To: Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> Cc: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, alc@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu> Subject: Re: nvidia-driver 195.22 use horribly broken on amd64 between r206173 and Message-ID: <AANLkTinnaeHiM7mWd_47LH77m8q6Z5KOPtM78RynjPMo@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinb2paAVMVXjXQBn7AseC5Iwydl7vs_HTCt4vWM@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTil33IEVGXxsjV1oqfBgKQq-aIJ9Ur1U0Gn8Gplt@mail.gmail.com> <4BFD4AE6.5040105@cs.rice.edu> <20100526165141.GF83316@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4BFD5D5F.8090106@cs.rice.edu> <AANLkTinb2paAVMVXjXQBn7AseC5Iwydl7vs_HTCt4vWM@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I'm by no means an expert in this area, but isn't removing the locking > on free a bad thing? Looking at the code, it seems that vm_page_unwire() only requires the page to be locked if it is managed. As it was acquired by contigmalloc, the page should be unmanaged so that should be ok. I am confused as to why vm_page_unwire() does not require the page to be locked if the page is unmanaged. What is synchronizing the accesses to m->wire_count?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTinnaeHiM7mWd_47LH77m8q6Z5KOPtM78RynjPMo>