On Tue, Mar 02, 1999 at 10:41:46PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > > Doesn't it modify the map indirectly vi subyte()? I think it wants > to prevent modifications, but this is impossible. >
Bear with me, I'll have to split some hairs... We're only interested in whether mincore directly changes the vm_map, literally modifying a vm_map_entry, etc. subyte is writing to memory, not a vm_map_entry. subyte is only indirectly changing the map because a page fault occurs. That page fault *is* (frequently) changing the map, and we're deadlocking when it attempts to acquire the write lock on the map. Basically, what I believe that you suggested yesterday, that mincore release the lock around the subyte is correct. Code will appear shortly... Alan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
