Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 17:37:52 +0200 (CEST) From: "A.J. \"Fonz\" van Werven" <a.j.werven@student.utwente.nl> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: Thierry Herbelot <thierry.herbelot@free.fr>, stable@freebsd.org, jhb@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Panic in recent 7.2-Stable Message-ID: <200909061537.n86FbqhP001617@satellite.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <20090906110238.GH47688@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kostik Belousov wrote:
> I expect that the following patch, that is the partial merge of r194459,
> would fix it. It patches sys/vm/vm_phys.c.
>
> Index: vm_phys.c
> ===================================================================
> --- vm_phys.c (revision 194458)
> +++ vm_phys.c (revision 194459)
> @@ -382,8 +382,7 @@
> if (pa >= seg->start && pa < seg->end)
> return (&seg->first_page[atop(pa - seg->start)]);
> }
> - panic("vm_phys_paddr_to_vm_page: paddr %#jx is not in any segment",
> - (uintmax_t)pa);
> + return (NULL);
> }
>
> /*
Hi,
A quick grep on the file in question revealed that there are two
functions that may panic() with "page not in any segment": the
vm_phys_paddr_to_vm_page() being patched and also the next function
vm_phys_paddr_to_segind(). I'm not exactly current with the memory
management code so this may be a very stupid question, but I'll ask it
anyway: don't both functions need to be patched?
My apologies if I'm way off the mark here, but I'm just trying to help.
Regards,
Alphons
--
All right, that does it Bill [Donahue]. I'm pretty sure that killing
Jesus is not very Christian.
-- Pope Benedict XVI, Southpark season 11 episode 5
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200909061537.n86FbqhP001617>