From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr  1 14:33:07 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEE18106564A
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue,  1 Apr 2008 14:33:07 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rdivacky@vlk.vlakno.cz)
Received: from vlakno.cz (vlk.vlakno.cz [62.168.28.247])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82BE68FC32
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue,  1 Apr 2008 14:33:07 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rdivacky@vlk.vlakno.cz)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB3E67B40B;
	Tue,  1 Apr 2008 16:32:51 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at vlakno.cz
Received: from vlakno.cz ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (vlk.vlakno.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id POwzlj6Z8uDa; Tue,  1 Apr 2008 16:32:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vlk.vlakno.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5279E679387;
	Tue,  1 Apr 2008 16:32:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (from rdivacky@localhost)
	by vlk.vlakno.cz (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m31EWZId051811;
	Tue, 1 Apr 2008 16:32:35 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from rdivacky)
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 16:32:35 +0200
From: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>
To: "Rao, Nikhil" <nikhil.rao@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20080401143235.GA51785@freebsd.org>
References: <20080329120018.0A8F5106567F@hub.freebsd.org>
	<12A5C15467D5B94F8E0FF265D9498ADD02CBF8FF@orsmsx419.amr.corp.intel.com>
	<20080401075623.GA19770@freebsd.org>
	<12A5C15467D5B94F8E0FF265D9498ADD02CBF949@orsmsx419.amr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <12A5C15467D5B94F8E0FF265D9498ADD02CBF949@orsmsx419.amr.corp.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: pfind() and the proc structure
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 14:33:07 -0000

On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 07:23:58AM -0700, Rao, Nikhil wrote:
> 
> Ok, I should have caught that :-( Another question - 
> Now that the PROC_LOCK on p is obtained the all_proc lock is released
> and the function returns, at this point can't the proc get deallocated ?

well.. thats why you hold the proc lock, isnt it? :)