Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 10:27:25 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Cc: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: non-recursive mutex, sbc, pcm, kernel panic Message-ID: <200405101027.25456.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200405091941.i49Jev7E096965@gw.catspoiler.org> References: <200405091941.i49Jev7E096965@gw.catspoiler.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 09 May 2004 03:40 pm, Don Lewis wrote: > Typically the proper fix in this case would be to remove the > sb_lock() call from sb_reset_dsp() and always let the caller do the > locking. The patch below should do the trick, though I believe the > added locking and unlocking (the second section of the patch) could be > omitted in sb16_attach() since no other thread can access the device > while the attach is in progress. Just a nit: I would add an assertion that the lock is held when sb_reset_dsp() is called as both documentation and to ensure that all callers hold it during testing and future development. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200405101027.25456.jhb>