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>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
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.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030817095607.GA83750>