Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 12:49:36 -0800 From: "Maksim Yevmenkin" <Maksim.Yevmenkin@cw.com> To: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>, "Bruce Evans" <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: PATCH: typo in socreate() or i'm missing something Message-ID: <45258A4365C6B24A9832BFE224837D552B1297@sjdcex01.int.exodus.net>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
Dear Hackers, <<On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 22:18:12 +1100 (EST), Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> said: > > Interestingly, socreate() in Lite2 always does a can-wait malloc() so > > our current soalloc(M_NOWAIT) does the same thing as Lite2 and is only > > wrong if the FreeBSD change from can-wait to "can-wait-if p != 0" > > change was needed and is still needed. > > When I initially revamped that code, I waited unconditionally and was > rewarded with an appropriate panic for sleeping in interrupt context. > I cannot speak as to whether it is still needed. well, what is the best way to proceed here? as far as i can see there are three options here: 1) leave it as it is for now 2) change it to so = soalloc(0); (i.e. never sleep) 3) revert it back to rotted so = soalloc(td != 0); in this case people like me will call socreate() with td == 0, and other will call socreate() with real td pointer or curthread. i personally do not like option 1) at all. are there any other options? suggestions? thanks, max To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the messagehelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45258A4365C6B24A9832BFE224837D552B1297>