Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:41:49 -0500 From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How is supposed to be protected the units list? Message-ID: <20100313004149.GA94041@sandvine.com> In-Reply-To: <4B9A93AC.9020000@feral.com> References: <3bbf2fe11003031532u2207eb55h19c3a045215a7d84@mail.gmail.com> <4B8EF336.80107@feral.com> <3bbf2fe11003031547kd5f7314t3d83b2bde06c1c2f@mail.gmail.com> <4B8EF990.5030407@feral.com> <3bbf2fe11003031607wa3727b5ke89bc2a909d4d6a6@mail.gmail.com> <4B901419.8060800@feral.com> <3bbf2fe11003041737p30690522ya81e1b8f4bd6bbf9@mail.gmail.com> <3bbf2fe11003120601y3c403a1ct50f9fc6c1f0903bf@mail.gmail.com> <4B9A91DA.7030107@FreeBSD.org> <4B9A93AC.9020000@feral.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:19:08AM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote: > That's a fair comment. There is at least one case where this additional > lock has helped. It probably needs rethinking a little later, but for > now it does seem to help people. Right, the change is an improvement over the status quo; we were experiencing an easily reproducible panic from this issue that is solved by this change. We can always change it again if a more optimal soultion is proposed. Thanks, Edhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100313004149.GA94041>