From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Sep 20 0:26:14 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3EA337B424 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:26:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id JAA37040; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 09:26:10 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA30318; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 09:26:10 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 09:26:10 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Terry Lambert Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: how mmap buffer writes handled? In-Reply-To: <200009200712.AAA00357@usr05.primenet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Per my original post, the reason is that a kernel write fault, Oops. I misunderstood your post. Apologies. > > (PS: The method you mentioned would still qualify as "force an exception > > to be raised when accessing the page for write" ;) > > Actually, not. It's on the order of the F00F bug fix, which is > a gross kludge of the worst sort. The page being written doesn't Agree. Might there not be some cleaner way of resolving the F00F bug ? ISTR having looked into this some time back. > exist. It's a non-existance exception, not an access exception, > since if the page mapping existed, it wouldn't result in the > exception in the first place. 8-). I did not specify "access" as a qualifier to "exception". Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message