Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Aug 2003 21:21:50 +0200
From:      des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=)
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/pseudofs pseudofs_vnops.c
Message-ID:  <xzpvfsupy9d.fsf@dwp.des.no>
In-Reply-To: <200308181802.h7II2XGZ013601@repoman.freebsd.org> (John Baldwin's message of "Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:02:33 -0700 (PDT)")
References:  <200308181802.h7II2XGZ013601@repoman.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
>   Log:
>   The allproc lock is a sx lock, not a mutex, so fix the assertion.  This
>   asserts that the sx lock is held, but does not specify if the lock is h=
eld
>   shared or exclusive, thus either type of lock satisfies the assertion.

My bad - but why didn't I get a warning about the incorrect pointer
type?  And why did the code run fine with INVARIANT_SUPPORT and
INVARIANTS defined?  Just lucky?

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpvfsupy9d.fsf>