Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 17:10:09 GMT From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/161887: [vm] [panic] panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3 [regression] Message-ID: <201110301710.p9UHA9Mb019315@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/161887; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Penta Upa <bsdboot@gmail.com> Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/161887: [vm] [panic] panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3 [regression] Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 19:00:28 +0200 on 30/10/2011 18:17 Penta Upa said the following: > > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org > <mailto:avg@freebsd.org>> wrote: > > > Do you build your test module as a part of a kernel+modules build or do you > build it in isolation? If the latter, then this could be a known obscure > problem. > > External. For example built in /home/penta/vmtest > > > > A standalone module build doesn't get some important definitions from kernel > config (e.g. via opt_global.h) and can be in a serious disagreement with the > kernel. In particular, if a kernel is built with SMP option, but a module build > doesn't have SMP defined, then they will have different definitions of > PA_LOCK_COUNT and thus would work on different actual locks when manipulating > the same page. > > Ok and it seems like they are operating on different locks then. > vm_page_assert() succeeds in the module but immediately fails in vm_page_wire(). > But then isn't vm_page_wire/unwire() and exported kernel api (i assumed it is > since there is a man page entry), so shouldn't it succeed irrespective of the > kernel config and irrespective of the location of the build. You described how things should be and I described how they are at the moment. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201110301710.p9UHA9Mb019315>