From owner-freebsd-current Tue Dec 24 6:16:56 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B929737B401; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 06:16:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from the-frontier.org (ns1.the-frontier.org [216.86.199.114]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A2F343EE6; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 06:16:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pscott@skycoast.us) Received: from [192.168.66.249] (dhcp-249-66-168-192.the-frontier.org [192.168.66.249]) by the-frontier.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA99139; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 06:16:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pscott@skycoast.us) User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 06:16:54 -0800 Subject: Re: revoke(2) redux... From: "Paul A. Scott" To: Poul-Henning Kamp , Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > From: "Paul A. Scott" > I think what's needed is some form of serialization > around revoke() and open(). I'm not a master of the init code, but it may be > that the code is inherently non-reentrant, so the original code would then > be okay. Or, it may use spltty()? Or some other lock-out mechanism? Paul -- Paul A. Scott mailto:pscott@skycoast.us http://skycoast.us/pscott/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message