On 19 Jun, Stefan Eßer wrote: > On 2003-06-18 20:41 -0700, Don Lewis <truckman_at_freebsd.org> wrote: >> On 18 Jun, Chris Shenton wrote: >> > Don Lewis <truckman_at_FreeBSD.org> writes: >> > >> >> Try the very untested patch below ... [ snip ] >> > Tried it, rebuilt kernel, rebooted, no affect :-( >> > >> > You were correct about apache using it. Doing a simple >> > >> > fetch http://pectopah/ >> > >> > causes the error, dropping me into ddb if panic enabled. A "tr" shows >> > the same trace as I submitted yesterday :-( >> >> Wierd ... I just tested the patch with ftpd which also uses sendfile() >> and didn't get any complaints from DEBUG_VFS_LOCKS. > > Not sure whether the following applies, but I think the patch > should be commited anyway: I don't think it applies, but ... > In PR kern/46652 I reported, that DEBUG_VFS_LOCKS does never > check the **vpp parameters. A patch is included in the PR and > it does generate the missing tests. > > I asked for feedback on the hackers mail list (IIRC), but did > not get any replies. > > Any objections against me committing the patch now ? > > (A different fix is mentioned in the PR, the patch I suggested > was the minimal change to the code which made it work, the > alternative seems cleaner to me ...) Please read PR kern/46652 ! I think the alternative fix should be committed. That would do the correct thing if another pointer to a pointer to a vnode argument is ever added. I think this is better than adding magic to vpp. Any idea if this change turns up more problems?Received on Thu Jun 19 2003 - 06:13:28 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:12 UTC