From owner-freebsd-smp  Fri Apr 27  4:26:22 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org
Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5A81E37B422; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 04:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net)
Received: (from bright@localhost)
	by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f3RBQKt23581;
	Fri, 27 Apr 2001 04:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 04:26:19 -0700
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To: smp@freebsd.org
Cc: dillon@freebsd.org, jhb@freebsd.org
Subject: that vm diff now makes it into single user mode.
Message-ID: <20010427042619.W18676@fw.wintelcom.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
X-all-your-base: are belong to us.
Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

If you're booting diskless you get to mounting/using the md0 disk
and you panic because I haven't made ufs_readwrite safe.

http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vm.diff

I'm having fun but a bit concerned, I have a lot of places where
locks are "optional", meaning that callers can have a lock or not
mostly depending on if the function being called will block or not.

Getting into UFS is starting to get somewhat hairy as there seems
like there's going to be a lock of lock/unlock or places where the
lock is held for a long period.

Anyhow, if you want to check it out, comment on what's going on
with it, let me know.  If you'd like to take a subsystem and work
out how to vm safe it let me know.  Just let me know, ok? :)

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [alfred@freebsd.org]
Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message