Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 09:03:40 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: net@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org, "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> Subject: Re: new zero copy sockets patches available Message-ID: <XFMail.20020518090340.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <3CE61A25.61C789FA@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 18-May-2002 Terry Lambert wrote: > Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> * Kenneth D. Merry <ken@kdm.org> [020517 23:31] wrote: >> > The problem here is that the mutex needs to be initialized before I can >> > acquire it, and there's going to be a race between checking to see >> > whether it has been initialized and actually initializing it. >> > >> ... >> > Suggestions? >> >> *slaps forhead* >> >> Probably a SYSINIT? > > God, it's annoying that a statically declared mutex is not > defacto initialized. Is it in solaris? > Yeah, I understand the "witness" crap (if it's there); that > doesn't make it any less annoying. > > Actually, a linker set (not a SYSINIT) could fix that... you > would still need one sysinit to do the linkage of the statically > declared structures, but it's at least doable. a SYSINIT just is a linker set, and there is a convenience SYSINIT MTX_SYSINIT() or what not that just registers a sysinit to initialize a 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-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20020518090340.jhb>