Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:54:19 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: "Christian S.J. Peron" <csjp@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fixup locking for kernel-linker, needs ndis testing(!) Message-ID: <200605311754.19724.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200605301856.10637.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200605241749.02885.jhb@freebsd.org> <44786C48.7030109@FreeBSD.org> <200605301856.10637.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 30 May 2006 18:56, John Baldwin wrote: > On Saturday 27 May 2006 11:12, Christian S.J. Peron wrote: > > > > Currently, we are using Giant to serialize access into the sysctl tree. > > This means that if the kernel linker is not picking up Giant, there > > could be a race between when the kernel modules load/unload sysctls, and > > somebody reading the sysctl tree. > > > > I am not sure what the best thing to do here is yet. I've looked at the > > locking for sysctl tree, and locking these entry points can be sticky > > due to the recursive nature of the code. > > I thought we had a big sx lock to protect the actual sysctl tree itself. Looks like we don't. :( We have a lock, but it's useless. I would hold off on testing this patch too much as I've subsequently tore it up a bunch and need to test it locally before posting an updated patch. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200605311754.19724.jhb>