From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 25 09:08:01 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1F1637B443 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 09:08:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail12.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.212]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6617943FE5 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 09:07:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 22846 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2003 16:08:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )encrypted SMTP for ; 25 Apr 2003 16:08:01 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h3PG7sOv003700; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 12:07:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.4 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <06fe01c30b42$66705210$52557f42@errno.com> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 12:07:56 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: Sam Leffler cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: Nate Lawson Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/fxp if_fxp.c if_fxpvar.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 16:08:02 -0000 On 25-Apr-2003 Sam Leffler wrote: >> For developers, note that the locking in the code path only protects the >> various fxp routines (fxp_start, fxp_intr, fxp_tick, ...) and is not >> intended to serialize access to ANY external structures. This is how it >> should be. Please do not copy the exact approach taken here for a little >> while until ifnet locking is finished as there may need to be some changes >> made to this model. > > This doesn't make much sense to me. I've locked numerous chunks of code and > used a totally different approach: synchronize access to data structures, > not code paths. Perhaps you and Jeffrey Hsu need to have a private > discussion... Agreed, locks should be protecting data structures, not code blocks. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/