Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 10:15:37 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: phk@phk.freebsd.dk Cc: scottl@samsco.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, jhb@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, attilio@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, rwatson@FreeBSD.org, kostikbel@gmail.com Subject: Re: svn commit: r192535 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <20090521.101537.864824728.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <1689.1242921616@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <4A157919.7040103@samsco.org> <1689.1242921616@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <1689.1242921616@critter.freebsd.dk>
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
: In message <4A157919.7040103@samsco.org>, Scott Long writes:
:
: >I would also love to have destroy_dev() and make_dev() be locking-neutral.
:
: As far as I know, there is nothing preventing that any more.
:
: The current state of affairs still reflects a reality from before
: SMPng entirely changed what "kernel locking" meant.
:
: I would also support merging CDEV notification into devd(8), it
: does not make much sense to have different mechanisms.
Right now, the devctl_notify() is what gets it into devd. However,
I'd always viewed devd as having multiple event sources and not just
from the /dev/devctl device.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090521.101537.864824728.imp>