On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 06:42:38PM +1100, matthew green wrote: > hm. does this really change anything?
You're right. I missed that the ums.c code is a bit different from uts.c and doesn't suffer from the same panic-inducing problem. > i've had a couple of crashes near here recently and i haven't been > able to understand them (or reproduce easily, with USBHIST), so i > was thinking this might help me, but unless i've missed something > above, this doesn't actually change behaviour. the issue in uts.c > does appear to have been a real problem, perhaps because it didn't > have the 2nd if() that ums_disable() currently does. Yes, uts_disable() was causing kern/59206 because of this. A friend of mine wanted to try 10.1 on his slightly outdated Thinkpad an ran into this immediately, which is why I tried to find the issue and fix it for them. > (note: the second if() could be removed now, since it will always > be true if the code gets to this point. oh, which makes it like > the uts.c version.) Will do. Hans -- %SYSTEM-F-ANARCHISM, The operating system has been overthrown
