On Friday 20 June 2008 04:35:01 Rafal Boni wrote:
> This just occurred to me after having filed this in the "I don't
> have time to think about it right now" bin. The issue here is that
> the pmap code is using the last-active-lwp as a proxy for
> last-active-pmap. What we should do is just save the pmap pointed to
> by the last-active-lwp vs. the lwp itself.
While that may solve the problem, it may well work against the intention
of "last-active-pmap", which is to reduce the impact of
context-switching between user-mode processes/lwps.
A simple fix would be to add the following to pmap_deactivate():