Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 01:05:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@FreeBSD.org> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: panic: reducing sbsize: lost count, uid = 1001 Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0008240103280.52828-100000@green.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20000823145244.J4854@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> [000823 14:29] wrote: > > > > I have a feeling that this is related to missing spl protection around > > the chgsbsize subsystem, this was probably an issue before I touched it > > but since I touched it last I'll have a look-see. > > > > Brian, does that makes sense? > [...] > > Does it make sense to wrap chgsbsize with spl so callers don't have > to worry about it? > Yeah, I say to go for it. I was /certain/ that these functions had the right spl()s before; if the patch fixes jdp's problem, I can't see a good reason not to change it, other than it would hide what may be quite problematic for other reasons even if not for that one... -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! / green@FreeBSD.org `------------------------------' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0008240103280.52828-100000>