Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:40:26 -0700
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>, Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        src-committers@FreeBSD.org, dev-commits-src-all@FreeBSD.org, dev-commits-src-main@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: git: 7ae879b14a20 - main - kern_procctl(): convert the function to be table-driven
Message-ID:  <91ebf9d8-5547-8570-18cb-26a58baf89ba@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <202110192035.19JKZDqM026085@slippy.cwsent.com>
References:  <202110192004.19JK4jN3069844@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <202110192035.19JKZDqM026085@slippy.cwsent.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/19/21 1:35 PM, Cy Schubert wrote:
> In message <202110192004.19JK4jN3069844@gitrepo.freebsd.org>, Konstantin
> Belous
> ov writes:
>> The branch main has been updated by kib:
>>
>> URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=7ae879b14a2086df521c59c4a379d3a0
>> 72e08bc6
>>
>> commit 7ae879b14a2086df521c59c4a379d3a072e08bc6
>> Author:     Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org>
>> AuthorDate: 2021-10-15 18:57:17 +0000
>> Commit:     Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org>
>> CommitDate: 2021-10-19 20:04:34 +0000
>>
>>      kern_procctl(): convert the function to be table-driven
>>      
>>      Reviewed by:    emaste, markj
>>      Sponsored by:   The FreeBSD Foundation
>>      MFC after:      1 week
>>      Differential revision:  https://reviews.freebsd.org/D32513
>> ---
>>   sys/kern/kern_procctl.c | 123 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>> --
>>   1 file changed, 69 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/sys/kern/kern_procctl.c b/sys/kern/kern_procctl.c
>> index eb36f0822938..90c5e63c7219 100644
>> --- a/sys/kern/kern_procctl.c
>> +++ b/sys/kern/kern_procctl.c
>> @@ -949,7 +957,14 @@ kern_procctl(struct thread *td, idtype_t idtype, id_t id
>> , int com, void *data)
>>   		error = EINVAL;
>>   		break;
>>   	}
>> -	if (tree_locked)
>> -		sx_unlock(&proctree_lock);
>> +
>> +	switch (cmd_info->lock_tree) {
>> +	case SA_XLOCKED:
>> +		sx_xunlock(&proctree_lock);
>> +		break;
>> +	case SA_SLOCKED:
>> +		sx_sunlock(&proctree_lock);
>> +		break;
>> +	}
>>   	return (error);
>>   }
>>
> 
> Should SA_* in fact be LA_*? SA_* in sys/sx.h assumes INVARIANTS whereas
> LA_* in sys/lock.h has no such requirement.

Both are for "assertions".  The LA_* constants aren't really public but are
the values used for witness_assert() that various foo_assert() routines in
locking APIs (mtx_assert/sx_assert, etc.) can use.  For locking APIs, the
type-specific macros are the ones you use, e.g. SA_* with sx_assert().

Given that, SA_* is the closest match here.

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?91ebf9d8-5547-8570-18cb-26a58baf89ba>