From owner-freebsd-smp Mon Apr 1 23:14:42 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5246237B416; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 23:14:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id 0CAE8AE03F; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 23:14:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 23:14:40 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: "Andrew R. Reiter" Cc: smp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Where to initialize certain locks... Message-ID: <20020402071440.GF93885@elvis.mu.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * Andrew R. Reiter [020401 22:16] wrote: > > I've been looking at some global values that are not associated with any > one subsystem, but need a lock at some point in order to guarantee correct > bheavior -- specifically, at the moment, the securelevel value. I do not > right away see a clean place for the related lock to be initialized... Am > I missing some SYSINIT() (or SYSINIT()s) that are meant for helping to > initialize locks in this type of situation while still > protecting/promoting correct order (to ensure we init prior to a lock > attempt)? Or is that not a good path to go down? SYSINIT should work provided you run them after the mutex subsystem is setup. :) -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message