On Aug 9, 2013, at 1:39 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, August 09, 2013 4:34:36 pm Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 9, 2013, at 12:56 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, August 09, 2013 12:43:50 pm David E. O'Brien wrote:
>>>> Author: obrien
>>>> Date: Fri Aug 9 16:43:50 2013
>>>> New Revision: 254150
>>>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/254150
>>>>
>>>> Log:
>>>> Add missing 'VPO_BUSY' from r254141 to fix kernel build break.
>>>>
>>>> Modified:
>>>> head/sys/vm/vm_page.h
>>>
>>> This can't possibly be correct as r254138 just removed this flag. If it
> isn't
>>> obvious how to fix the uses added back in r254141, then r254141 should be
>>> reverted instead.
>>>
>>> Hmm, looking at the relevant bits of r254141, it doesn't look obvious:
>>>
>>> + /* Detach the old page from the resident tailq. */
>>> + TAILQ_REMOVE(&object->memq, mold, listq);
>>> + vm_page_lock(mold);
>>
>> Replace the next four lines with
>>
>> vm_page_xunbusy(mold);
>
> That is going to recurse on vm_page_lock(), is that ok?
>
No, it's not.
>>> + if (mold->oflags & VPO_BUSY) {
>>> + mold->oflags &= ~VPO_BUSY;
>>> + vm_page_flash(mold);
>>> + }
>>>
>>> Since nothing is setting this flag, this can't possibly work correctly
>>> currently. I wouldn't boot a top-of-tree kernel right now. :(
>>>
>>> --
>>> John Baldwin
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> John Baldwin
>
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
