Re: new panic (was: Re: "busy buffer problem" panics)

[Andrew Atrens <atrens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Matt,

This is interesting, just tried to apply your patch and I get
rejects (see below)

After looking closely I see that I _was_ in fact still using your
patch .. well not quite ... I messed up one chunk when I was manually
applying it .. I applied chunk 3 additions to line 108+ instead of line
123+ ..

I guess a lot of the code in that file looks similar :( ...

Just rebooting now, if you don't hear back in the next 1/2 hour
it means that I'm still fscking :) :)

Andrew.


|Index: linux_util.c
|===================================================================
|RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/emulation/linux/linux_util.c,v
|retrieving revision 1.8
|diff -u -r1.8 linux_util.c
|--- linux_util.c       13 Nov 2003 04:04:42 -0000      1.8
|+++ linux_util.c       3 Sep 2004 04:49:27 -0000
--------------------------
Patching file linux_util.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 74.
Hunk #2 failed at 85.
Hunk #3 failed at 123.
Hunk #4 failed at 186.
4 out of 4 hunks failed--saving rejects to linux_util.c.rej
Hmm...  The next patch looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|Index: i386/linprocfs/linprocfs_vnops.c
|===================================================================
|RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/emulation/linux/i386/linprocfs/linprocfs_vnops.c,v
|retrieving revision 1.16
|diff -u -r1.16 linprocfs_vnops.c
|--- i386/linprocfs/linprocfs_vnops.c   17 Aug 2004 18:57:32 -0000      1.16
|+++ i386/linprocfs/linprocfs_vnops.c   4 Sep 2004 04:16:50 -0000
--------------------------
Patching file i386/linprocfs/linprocfs_vnops.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 succeeded at 632.
Hunk #2 succeeded at 652.
Hunk #3 succeeded at 662.
Hunk #4 succeeded at 676.
Hunk #5 succeeded at 713.
Hunk #6 succeeded at 735.
done