On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 03:07:56PM -0500, Alan Cox wrote: A> On 04/05/2015 14:34, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: A> > On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 12:45:00PM -0500, Alan Cox wrote: A> > A> On 04/05/2015 10:47, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: A> > A> > On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 06:37:58AM -0700, David Wolfskill wrote: A> > A> > D> It ocurred rather late in the transition to multi-user mode, but A> > A> > D> prior to starting xdm (on my laptop). A> > A> > D> A> > A> > D> Previous (working) head/i386 for this machine was r281074. A> > A> > D> A> > A> > D> Here's the first bit of the crashinfo (yes, I have a crash dump): A> > A> > D> A> > A> > D> g1-254.catwhisker.org dumped core - see /var/crash/vmcore.3 A> > A> > D> A> > A> > D> Sun Apr 5 06:18:44 PDT 2015 A> > A> > D> A> > A> > D> FreeBSD g1-254.catwhisker.org 11.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #1561 r281106M/281106:1100067: Sun Apr 5 06:01:06 PDT 2015 root_at_g1-254.catwhisker.org:/common/S4/obj/usr/src/sys/CANARY i386 A> > A> > D> A> > A> > D> panic: Lock vm object not exclusively locked _at_ /usr/src/sys/vm/vm_page.c:2637 A> > A> > A> > A> > This is r281079. A> > A> > A> > A> > Since vm_page_advise() may call vm_page_dirty() in the MADV_DONTNEED case, A> > A> > the assertion is valid. So, looks like vm_fault_dontneed() needs W-lock on A> > A> > the first_object. A> > A> > A> > A> A> > A> Actually, what I forgot was that vm_page_advise(MADV_FREE) clears the A> > A> page's dirty field, and that is why an exclusive lock is asserted. As A> > A> explained in vm_page.h, the pmap is allowed to set the dirty field to A> > A> all ones without any locking. Moreover, the new "fast" path in A> > A> vm_fault() sets the dirty field with only a read lock held. A> > A> vm_page_advise(MADV_DONTNEED) isn't really any different from the fast path. A> > A> A> > A> Need to think a bit ... A> > A> > Can you please plug the panic somehow interim? For me the assert fires 100% A> > reliably on any build attempt. Right now I changed vm_fault_dontneed() to A> > take W-lock, so that I can continue running head. Not sure this is correct A> > measure. A> > A> A> Just curious, amd64 or i386? Panics on amd64...., while building a kernel for i386, if that matters :) -- Totus tuus, Glebius.Received on Sun Apr 05 2015 - 18:17:52 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:56 UTC