From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 16 15:44:53 2004 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 20F4A16A4CE; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:44:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.des.no (flood.des.no [217.116.83.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7524C43D1D; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:44:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666) id 631B55309; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:44:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.228.37]) by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP id B0B425308; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:44:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 405EB33C9A; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:44:36 +0100 (CET) To: Robert Watson References: From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:44:36 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Robert Watson's message of "Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:24:24 -0500 (EST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090024 (Oort Gnus v0.24) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.61 (1.212.2.1-2003-12-09-exp) on flood.des.no X-Spam-Level: ss X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK, RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.61 cc: "Brian F. Feldman" cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_descrip.c 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, 16 Jan 2004 23:44:53 -0000 Robert Watson writes: > It sounds like this is an API problem, and is probably what we > should fix. I've found WITNESS an invaluable debugging tool for > locking, and when programming on systems without it, it's a very > painful experience (i.e., debugging lock orders on Darwin). You've > also pointed out that the extra locking work being done is actually > unnecessary, so maybe we just need an _unlocked() version of the > API, or changes elsewhere? The only case in which the locking is unnecessary is when initializing a new struct filedesc. In all other cases it is required. Creating an unlocked version of the API would require duplicating a lot of code, for very little gain. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no