From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Aug 17 02:56:11 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 1BADD37B401; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 02:56:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie (salmon.maths.tcd.ie [134.226.81.11])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP
	id 848DC43FA3; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 02:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie)
Received: from walton.maths.tcd.ie by salmon.maths.tcd.ie with SMTP
          id <aa61571@salmon>; 17 Aug 2003 10:56:08 +0100 (BST)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:56:07 +0100
From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Message-ID: <20030817095607.GA83750@walton.maths.tcd.ie>
References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030816101518.83755D-100000@fledge.watson.org>
	<22299.1061065123@critter.freebsd.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <22299.1061065123@critter.freebsd.dk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i
Sender: dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie
cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
cc: current@freebsd.org
cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject: Re: LOR with filedesc structure and Giant
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 09:56:11 -0000

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.