From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Feb  1 06:25:37 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D352C106566B
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue,  1 Feb 2011 06:25:37 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lijimlee@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com (mail-ey0-f182.google.com
	[209.85.215.182])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66A628FC0C
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue,  1 Feb 2011 06:25:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by eyf6 with SMTP id 6so3084619eyf.13
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 22:25:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth
	:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
	bh=vaI/+LOAd9CipPy4AFDpyJXc/1sZTuuvR0BePGQ7fS0=;
	b=ock+V+z0duvRxePEnKgpa2B/nvbWM2Gib+GES18p85yggzLjkU1VulglodhJpymszf
	JoRgorVgqOSVAS4XrECCb4OsO+5/je5GrwgAiJYl+6KLxUnv2qZH51ncjVW6+tozWY3u
	DiyOLMbC74DdGpPajgdSQAsNX7V255hXIPSEg=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject
	:from:to:content-type;
	b=JGVe7GA/RW2yC7GFngIfLiftdVKqNruAT0fwgUULP/tCIoAKAj+lQpx0hiC6DRoHt6
	wJYgcBeC2e7ijt+GOJNRWi2WfMuLhPX0udIVyL22NtJjIV/ymOrMpI9AnCD+aw5OrKGE
	9nzpNAtNXqt/fzQSDlh4uI7PT7ZWMxOYPiehA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.14.127.137 with SMTP id d9mr915267eei.2.1296539673188; Mon, 31
	Jan 2011 21:54:33 -0800 (PST)
Sender: lijimlee@gmail.com
Received: by 10.14.53.72 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:54:33 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:54:33 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: CNwyy3Wi34Vs4RI2l67iCcBacjA
Message-ID: <AANLkTinrVJ4jehNm7xh=ix7k3r0Q0YY38nc59AkgiP_P@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jim <uukkhh@gmail.com>
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
Subject: why use INP_WLOCK instead of INP_RLOCK
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
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: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 06:25:37 -0000

Hi All,

I am not sure if anybody has asked it before. I could not find answer by
doing rough search on Internet, if it is duplicate question, sorry in
advance.

My question is that, for getting socket options in tcp_ctloutput() in
tcp_usrreq.c, why do we need to do lock with INP_WLOCK(inp) as setting
socket options does. Why do we just use INP_RLOCK(inp), as it looks not
changing anything in tcp control block?

Thank you for your kindly answer.

Jim