Re: 5.2-BETA panic: page fault

On  1 Dec, Stefan Ehmann wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 01:10, Don Lewis wrote:
>> Can you reproduce this problem without bktr?
>> 
> <snip>
>> You are getting a double panic, with the second happening during the
>> file system sync.  The code seems to be be tripping over the same mount
>> list entry each time.  Maybe the mount list is getting corrupted.  Are
>> you using amd?  Print *lkp in the lockmgr() stack frame.
>> 
>> 
>> You might want to add
>> 	KASSERT(mp->mnt_lock.lk_interlock !=NULL, "vfs_busy: NULL mount
>>         pointer interlock");
>> at the top of vfs_busy() and right before the lockmgr() call.
> 
> No, I'm not using amd.
> 
> (kgdb) print *lkp
> $1 = {lk_interlock = 0x0, lk_flags = 0, lk_sharecount = 0, lk_waitcount
> = 0, 
>   lk_exclusivecount = 0, lk_prio = 0, lk_wmesg = 0x0, lk_timo = 0, 
>   lk_lockholder = 0x0, lk_newlock = 0x0}
> 
> This is indeed just NULLs.

Not good.  Nothing should be writing to lk_interlock once it has been
initialized.  Either something is stomping on an active struct mount,
we're still using it after it has been put on the free list, or
dp->v_mountedhere is pointing somewhere bogus.  I don't suspect the
latter because the second panic() in the sync() code doesn't follow this
path to get to the struct mount.

> I haven't tried without bktr yet but I hope I'll have time for that (and
> the KASSERT) tomorrow.
> 
> The panic only seems to happen when accessing my read-only mounted ext2
> partition. Today I tried not to access any data there and uptime is
> 14h30min now. The panic always happened after a few hours. So this is
> probably the core of the problem.

That sounds like a possibility.  I might be able to try that here when I
have some idle time on my -CURRENT box.

Can you print *dp->v_mountedhere in the lookup() frame?  That should
show the mount point information and might show if anything else in
struct mount is damaged.