Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 09:12:02 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: scottl@samsco.org Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, jhb@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, attilio@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, rwatson@freebsd.org, kostikbel@gmail.com Subject: Re: svn commit: r192535 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <20090522.091202.1501528033.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <4A16AC32.2040507@samsco.org> References: <3bbf2fe10905211511g53defb6cmac45fc2469cc64f@mail.gmail.com> <200905220921.34785.jhb@freebsd.org> <4A16AC32.2040507@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <4A16AC32.2040507@samsco.org>
Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> writes:
: John Baldwin wrote:
: > On Thursday 21 May 2009 6:11:02 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
: >> At this point I wonder what's the purpose of maintaining the sleeping
: >> version for such functions?
: >
: > Actually, I still very much do not like using M_NOWAIT needlessly. I would
: > much rather the solution for make_dev() be that the 1 or 2 places that need
: > to do it with a mutex held instead queue a task to do the actual make_dev()
: > in a taskqueue when no locks are held. This is basically what
: > destroy_dev_sched() is doing. Perhaps a make_dev_sched() with a similar
: > callback to be called on completion would be better. Having a device driver
: > do all the work to setup the hardware only to fail to create a node in /dev
: > so that userland can actually use it is pretty rediculous and useless.
: >
:
: It's a lot easier for me to handle a failure of make_dev in CAM than it
: is to decouple the call to it. Please don't dictate policy.
On the other hand, we do dictate policy in things like busdma where
one has to do things in callbacks rather than inline. This is for
fairly good reasons, and I'm having trouble seeing why the reasons
presented here for make_dev_sched() are any worse...
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090522.091202.1501528033.imp>