From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 26 19:56:10 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2927106566C for ; Wed, 26 May 2010 19:56:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rysto32@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CD7B8FC15 for ; Wed, 26 May 2010 19:56:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyj26 with SMTP id 26so1762357wyj.13 for ; Wed, 26 May 2010 12:56:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=0ZY6C6+6sPeVzR/xIAbNruXgyymB4spcMnH/h5VTk+M=; b=ZpLY5Rn2R2DEpvjATKKvPQsog4ah0axjCHHigjpnLVAQ6gYS45FojOhaoGgos3CPdB DJPnkhuzWv2vomq0OncrikrwHtsnidYi+4bGu71NBgVwL5vzH5XyKxbPlKX6cOoXQHnA X/d+g5f40PmTZUYn2laqpJdCLJicRTXWogunc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=LNRbkBn/+TNrCUg28DgXNOS5Ie7glHwJA1gyjEoTmQCySgAseqb9kkE/RISOHDulZb f9SeUUyuzTS1EBO5NWzAl5LP+sipdSNR2O9NZFHBsxNtfvuEWOz3l4fFSdaheTzVRcH1 Q2Q7cwA9vIkdii2KsY/WF7F/DBrDFIt7+1bfU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.141.201 with SMTP id n9mr9114205wbu.31.1274903769364; Wed, 26 May 2010 12:56:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.36.135 with HTTP; Wed, 26 May 2010 12:56:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4BFD4AE6.5040105@cs.rice.edu> <20100526165141.GF83316@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4BFD5D5F.8090106@cs.rice.edu> Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 15:56:09 -0400 Message-ID: From: Ryan Stone To: Garrett Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Kostik Belousov , alc@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current , Alan Cox Subject: Re: nvidia-driver 195.22 use horribly broken on amd64 between r206173 and X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 19:56:11 -0000 > 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?