Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:56:07 +0100 From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: LOR with filedesc structure and Giant Message-ID: <20030817095607.GA83750@walton.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <22299.1061065123@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030816101518.83755D-100000@fledge.watson.org> <22299.1061065123@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 10:18:43PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > At one point we have to say "Well, the locks we have above are solid, > but we need to drop Giant below here" but if Witness sees a > PICKUP_GIANT() as an acquisition of Giant, rather than as a > resumption of Giant, this clearly does not work. Wouldn't the risk of deadlock be real, even if it is only a resumption of Giant? I guess another option is to drop all the locks that are held and reqcquire all of them in the right order... David.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030817095607.GA83750>