From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 23 22:54:55 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57FB05F4;
 Thu, 23 Jan 2014 22:54:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from onelab2.iet.unipi.it (onelab2.iet.unipi.it [131.114.59.238])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14C5B1626;
 Thu, 23 Jan 2014 22:54:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by onelab2.iet.unipi.it (Postfix, from userid 275)
 id 492C97300A; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:57:23 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:57:23 +0100
From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>
To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: possible selrecord optimization ?
Message-ID: <20140123225723.GB11319@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
References: <CA+hQ2+hW4_8tkCqyUWUWR_VV+6Jp=t0XzVE5kaWFz=SKDd2bow@mail.gmail.com>
 <201401221429.56745.jhb@freebsd.org>
 <20140123003948.GC292@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
 <201401231452.41509.jhb@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <201401231452.41509.jhb@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 22:54:55 -0000

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 02:52:41PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 7:39:48 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
...
> > 2. am i correct that we do need to protect concurrent invocations
> >    of selrecord() on the same selinfo because mtx_pool_find()
> >    return the same mutex for a given struct selinfo ?
> 
> If you mean 'do not need', yes.  mtx_pool_find() does a hash on the address,

yes, i meant "do not need".

thanks
luigi