Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 22:40:45 +0100 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com> Cc: Tom Judge <tom@tomjudge.com>, Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Panic in vm_map_stack Message-ID: <3bbf2fe11003261440x15d07d54i4bae8e67e917736d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <a31046fc1003261407t32a8f8b9s15646328ef574704@mail.gmail.com> References: <4BACF92E.60600@tomjudge.com> <20100326195659.GU2415@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4BAD1498.5040402@tomjudge.com> <a31046fc1003261407t32a8f8b9s15646328ef574704@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2010/3/26 pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com>: > On 26 March 2010 23:10, Tom Judge <tom@tomjudge.com> wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> This is the function, I am guessing that I need to unlock the proc >> before calling vmspace_free ? >> >> > > As far as I know you cannot lock a process around > locking vmspace and/or vm_map (at least on 6.x). > I used process reference counting for that purpose. > Sort of the following mumble.. Generally that is true for vm_map_lock() because it is a sx_lock (thus sleeping) but in this case it is used a trylock operation that won't sleep (and I assume that is why it is used), thus it is not a problem. The vmspace refcounting doesn't impose any extra-constraint instead, thus the lock dance is not required here I think. Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3bbf2fe11003261440x15d07d54i4bae8e67e917736d>