From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jul 27 14:38:54 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E81E9106566C;
	Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:38:54 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D548FC13;
	Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:38:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.51.2])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08C243F5CF;
	Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:38:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o6REcqJm027238;
	Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:38:52 GMT (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:50:33 +0300."
	<4C4ED619.7050305@FreeBSD.org> 
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:38:52 +0000
Message-ID: <27237.1280241532@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
Cc: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Hyperactive g_event thread 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations
	<freebsd-geom.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-geom>,
	<mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-geom>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-geom@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-geom>,
	<mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:38:55 -0000

In message <4C4ED619.7050305@FreeBSD.org>, Alexander Motin writes:
>Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

>I have already removed alike timeouts on up/down threads and it indeed
>was safe there. But are you really sure about this specific case? Cause
>I'm not. Up/down threads using msleep and checking lack of work after
>dropping/grabbing lock. Event thread instead does several tasks, drops
>lock few times between them and uses tsleep(). I would say there should
>be a bunch of race conditions.

Quite likely, I didn't say it would be a trivial thing to remove
that workaround :-)

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.