From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Oct  1 04:19:22 2004
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 2389D16A4CE; Fri,  1 Oct 2004 04:19:22 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from cs.rice.edu (cs.rice.edu [128.42.1.30])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A5B5F43D31; Fri,  1 Oct 2004 04:19:21 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from alc@cs.rice.edu)
Received: from localhost (calypso.cs.rice.edu [128.42.1.127])
	by cs.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B6964A9F7;
	Thu, 30 Sep 2004 23:19:21 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from cs.rice.edu ([128.42.1.30])
 by localhost (calypso.cs.rice.edu [128.42.1.127]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with LMTP id 19570-01-36; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 23:19:19 -0500 (CDT)
Received: by cs.rice.edu (Postfix, from userid 19572)
	id 363E64A9F6; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 23:19:19 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 23:19:19 -0500
From: Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu>
To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20041001041919.GC16408@cs.rice.edu>
References: <20040930091814.GG39252@elvis.mu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040930091814.GG39252@elvis.mu.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavis-20030616-p7 at cs.rice.edu
cc: alc@freebsd.org
cc: net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: aio patch for review.
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: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 04:19:22 -0000

On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 02:18:14AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> properly cover the socket buffer for operations that need locking.
> 

Just to be clear, your point is that soreadable() and sowriteable()
should be performed with the corresponding socket buffer locked.
Correct?  If so, yes, please go ahead and commit it.

Alan