Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 01:03:06 +0200 From: "Attilio Rao" <attilio@freebsd.org> To: "Kip Macy" <kip.macy@gmail.com> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org>, Kip Macy <kmacy@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 126330 for review Message-ID: <3bbf2fe10709121603r73861f04vb06790bea9400435@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <b1fa29170709121549m7218965fs2682c8b5bd63e58b@mail.gmail.com> References: <200709120832.l8C8WLlm085731@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070912150017.GA3553@garage.freebsd.pl> <b1fa29170709121450r5f59430bqa13373fdf807cadc@mail.gmail.com> <3bbf2fe10709121530h6d0681c4xa247fe7d31cb2c2e@mail.gmail.com> <20070912223833.GC4909@garage.freebsd.pl> <b1fa29170709121549m7218965fs2682c8b5bd63e58b@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2007/9/13, Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com>: > Andrew Thompson explicitly asked for the possibility of shared acquisition. > Probabilly, would be feasible to modify knlist_lock() (if necessary) and softclock() in order to accept a further argument on how to do internal locking. Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3bbf2fe10709121603r73861f04vb06790bea9400435>