Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 21:04:57 -0800 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> Cc: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com>, FreeBSD Hackers <Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Even more info on daily panics... Message-ID: <199611130504.VAA07192@root.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 13 Nov 1996 13:52:14 %2B0900." <Pine.SV4.3.95.961113134357.11206A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>IMHO, it's not good to speculate. You need to confirm with absolute >certainty that the patch is what actually fixed it. > >You might want to do either of the following: > >1) Remove the patch and see if what happens. > >2) Put in print statements and see if the relevent section of code ever >gets executed. See other #ifdef DIAGNOSTICS for examples of how to do >this. I think vrele() had one. I would also like to hear an explaination of how it is possible, after the patch to vrele to prevent it from going negative, for a vnode with a non-zero v_usecount can be on the freelist in the first place. -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611130504.VAA07192>