Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 29 May 2009 13:32:59 +0100 (BST)
From:      Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r193030 - in head: share/man/man9 sys/kern sys/net sys/security/mac sys/sys
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.0905291332010.80270@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10905290457k7a00616dj43fc67a75d4a12b7@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <200905291052.n4TAqc5q072775@svn.freebsd.org> <3bbf2fe10905290457k7a00616dj43fc67a75d4a12b7@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 29 May 2009, Attilio Rao wrote:

>>  Make the rmlock(9) interface a bit more like the rwlock(9) interface:
>>
>>  - Add rm_init_flags() and accept extended options only for that variation.
>>  - Add a flags space specifically for rm_init_flags(), rather than borrowing
>>    the lock_init() flag space.
>>  - Define flag RM_RECURSE to use instead of LO_RECURSABLE.
>>  - Define flag RM_NOWITNESS to allow an rmlock to be exempt from WITNESS
>>    checking; this wasn't possible previously as rm_init() always passed
>>    LO_WITNESS when initializing an rmlock's struct lock.
>>  - Add RM_SYSINIT_FLAGS().
>>  - Rename embedded mutex in rmlocks to make it more obvious what it is.
>>  - Update consumers.
>>  - Update man page.
>
> Thanks!

There's quite a bit more to be done with rmlocks -- among other things, lock 
assertion support is quite incomplete, and it needs to integrate with WITNESS 
better.  I probably don't have time to work on this, but perhaps for someone 
with a bit more experience with our locking primitives it would prove straight 
forward? :-)

Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.0905291332010.80270>