From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 18 17:52:11 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 570C337B900; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 17:52:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id RAA17353; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 17:52:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 17:52:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200004190052.RAA17353@apollo.backplane.com> To: Alan Cox Cc: Brian Fundakowski Feldman , Alfred Perlstein , Michael Reifenberger , current@FreeBSD.ORG, alc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Anyone able to verify the fix for (was Re: panic: vm_object_shadow: source object has OBJ_ONEMAPPING set.) References: <200004181736.KAA14683@apollo.backplane.com> <20000418194126.C2616@cs.rice.edu> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG : :This patch introduces a new bug. While it does guarantee that :the assertion in vm_object_shadow isn't tripped over, it doesn't :clear the OBJ_ONEMAPPING flag on the newly created shadow object. :(New objects are created with OBJ_ONEMAPPING set.) Consequently, :we'll have two overlapping mappings to the same shadow object :that has OBJ_ONEMAPPING set. That's bad. : :Alan Ach. I'll just clear in both places. I really don't have time to go through the code and 'do it right', but if someone else wants to I'll be happy to review their code. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message