Date: Thu, 02 May 2002 10:00:16 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, "Nelson, Trent ." <tnelson@switch.com> Subject: Re: Kernel spin lock facilities Message-ID: <XFMail.20020502100016.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20020501161502.GF98487@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01-May-2002 Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Nelson, Trent . <tnelson@switch.com> [020501 06:41] wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm working on porting the Linux Cisco VPN client kernel module to >> FreeBSD. The API interface between the OS and their actual driver has four >> spinlock functions that operate around a handle (void *) to a ``critical >> section'': >> >> CNI_free_spin_lock >> CNI_new_spin_lock >> CNI_spin_lock >> CNI_spin_unlock >> >> Funnily enough, these wrap the Linux spinlock_t/spin_lock*() >> functionality quite nicely. Does the FreeBSD kernel offer such a trivial >> spinlock facility? If not, could anyone suggest what type of locking >> mechanism would best be used? > > man 9 mutex, see the MTX_SPIN section, but you might not need it. Actually, a normal mutex would probably be best. On stable these would be nops. On current I would use a MTX_DEF mutex. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20020502100016.jhb>