From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun 22 17:04:11 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 306ED37B401
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from angelica.unixdaemons.com (angelica.unixdaemons.com
	[209.148.64.135])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C47643FD7
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bmilekic@technokratis.com)
Received: from angelica.unixdaemons.com (bmilekic@localhost.unixdaemons.com
	[127.0.0.1])h5N047rd003529;	Sun, 22 Jun 2003 20:04:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from bmilekic@localhost)
	by angelica.unixdaemons.com (8.12.9/8.12.1/Submit) id h5N047Hp003528;
	Sun, 22 Jun 2003 20:04:07 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from bmilekic@technokratis.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: angelica.unixdaemons.com: bmilekic set sender to
	bmilekic@technokratis.com using -f
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 20:04:07 -0400
From: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com>
To: "George V. Neville-Neil" <gnn@neville-neil.com>
Message-ID: <20030623000407.GA2911@technokratis.com>
References: <87el1lr7ep.wl@jchurch.neville-neil.com.neville-neil.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87el1lr7ep.wl@jchurch.neville-neil.com.neville-neil.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Fine grained locking at the socket level?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 00:04:11 -0000


On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 04:58:54PM -0700, George V. Neville-Neil wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 	It would seem that splnet() and frieds now simply return 0,
> 	which I figure is part of making the code look like it used
> 	to.  What I'm wondering is why the Giant lock is still used in
> 	the socket layer?  I thought sockets had had fine grained
> 	locking applied to them.  Am I confused?  I'm looking at the
> 	bits du jour (-CURRENT).
> 
> Thanks,
> George

  The short answer is: we're not done.

  The long answer is: we're not done. :-)  We can't simply unwind Giant
  just anywhere yet because there is still code in other layers that
  requires Giant.

Cheers,
-- 
Bosko Milekic  *  bmilekic@technokratis.com  *  bmilekic@FreeBSD.org
TECHNOkRATIS Consulting Services  *  http://www.technokratis.com/