From owner-freebsd-current Sat Apr 15 10:31:38 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCF0E37B836; Sat, 15 Apr 2000 10:31:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from green@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 13:31:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Fundakowski Feldman X-Sender: green@green.dyndns.org To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: Michael Reifenberger , "dillon @ freebsd . org FreeBSD-Current" , alc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: panic: vm_object_shadow: source object has OBJ_ONEMAPPING set. In-Reply-To: <20000415092639.Q4381@fw.wintelcom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Yes, find all places where source->ref_count is incremented and check > for OBJ_ONEMAPPING as well as where OBJ_ONEMAPPING is set. > > Then add some printfs to find the snippet that's incrementing it > to complain when the OBJ_ONEMAPPING bit is set, and complain if > setting OBJ_ONEMAPPING when the refcount is too high. > > Blotting out a KASSERT isn't the right thing to do. Well, first the question must be answered, in an absolute yes or no: is it wrong in the first place to have OBJ_ONEMAPPING set with a ref_count of more than 1? I'd accept an authoritative answer about this from alc, dillon, dyson, or luoqi, who are all very familiar with the new VM. > -- > -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] > "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! / green@FreeBSD.org `------------------------------' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message