From owner-freebsd-smp  Thu Dec  5 10:34:56 1996
Return-Path: <owner-smp>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id KAA22690
          for smp-outgoing; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:34:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id KAA22683
          for <smp@freebsd.org>; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:34:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.2/8.6.9) id NAA05328; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 13:34:01 -0500 (EST)
From: John Dyson <dyson@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199612051834.NAA05328@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Re: make locking more generic?
To: smp@csn.net (Steve Passe)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 13:34:01 -0500 (EST)
Cc: vanmaren@fast.cs.utah.edu, ccsanady@friley216.res.iastate.edu,
        peter@spinner.dialix.com, smp@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199612051804.LAA13790@clem.systemsix.com> from "Steve Passe" at Dec 5, 96 11:04:17 am
Reply-To: dyson@freebsd.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-smp@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> > This is all part of the enormous problem of adding fine-grained 
> > locking to an existing single-threaded kernel.
> 
> yes, it will be a HUGE task to get it right!
> 
That is the reason that I am kind-of asking which directions that you
are looking at.  If you don't have anything in mind at the VFS/VM
levels, I will look at it from a reasonable viewpoint myself...

John