Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 22 Feb 1999 02:30:50 +1100
From:      Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
To:        bde@zeta.org.au, green@unixhelp.org
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: one SysV bug/fix, how many more
Message-ID:  <199902211530.CAA15265@godzilla.zeta.org.au>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> spl is for blocking interrupts.  Process-related things shouldn't be and
>> mostly aren't touched by interrupts.

>But without an spl, couldn't multiple processes do Very Bad Things in a
>partially shared proc context?

They can do that with or without an spl if they don't lock things properly
spl can give improper giant locking as a side effect, but it doesn't
necessarily prevent other processes running, since tsleep() isn't locked
by spls.

Bruce


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?199902211530.CAA15265>