Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:02:24 -0400 From: Ed Maste <emaste@phaedrus.sandvine.ca> To: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, ming fu <fming@borderware.com> Subject: Re: what to replace splnet in FreeBSD 5.x? Message-ID: <20050712150224.GA38249@sandvine.com> In-Reply-To: <42D006DB.8080108@errno.com> References: <42CEF0EB.4000107@borderware.com> <42D006DB.8080108@errno.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 10:18:19AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote: > spl's lock execution threads. 5.x and later systems mostly lock data > structures using mtx's (there are a very few exceptions). Thus there > isn't necessarily a direct replacement, you usually need to rethink your > locking/synchronization strategy. This brings up the issue of the remaining splnet()s in 5.x and -CURRENT. Grepping for "= splnet" in net/ and netinet/ shows more than 50 now no-op splnet()s left in the stack. We've run into corruption in the multicast address lists (in_multihead) on 5.x, and it turns out in_addmulti still has splnet() "protecting" the list. I'm not sure how many of the splnet()s are actually false positives (i.e. no longer relevant, locked in another way, etc.) but they're probably all good indicators of places that locking still needs to be revisited. -- Ed Maste, Sandvine Incorporated
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050712150224.GA38249>