From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 15 07:37:49 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECC6D37B401 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 07:37:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu (web.cs.ndsu.NoDak.edu [134.129.125.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42CC743F3F for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 07:37:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tinguely@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu) Received: from web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu (8.12.9/8.11.4) with ESMTP id h6FEbmsb019074; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 09:37:48 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from tinguely@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu) Received: (from tinguely@localhost) by web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu (8.12.9/8.12.8/Submit) id h6FEbln6019073; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 09:37:47 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from tinguely) Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 09:37:47 -0500 (CDT) From: mark tinguely Message-Id: <200307151437.h6FEbln6019073@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> To: bremen@immortalsky.com, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, tinguely@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu In-Reply-To: <000901c34a5b$720d9d00$6500a8c0@hermione> Subject: Re: contigmalloc1 panic on install X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:37:50 -0000 > Regarding this issue, I've got a 5.1-CURRENT snapshot (as of 7-9) which is > still displaying this problem. I have a debug kernel and can provide some > more detail : > > agp0: mem 0xf8000000-0xfbffffff at device > 0.0 on pci0 > agp0: allocatnig GATT for aperture size 0M > panic: contigmalloc1: size must not be 0 > Debugger("panic") > Stopped at Debugger+0x54: xchgl %ebx,in_Debugger.0 there is really two problems (in my opinion): 1) AGP_GET_APERTURE() is failing to return the aperture. 2) agp_alloc_gatt() should return an error (0) if AGP_GET_APERTURE() fails instead of malloc/contigmalloc. This would result in no monitor use, but that would be better than a panic. --Mark.