From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 20 09:14:02 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9068C16A4B3 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.mho.com (smtp.mho.net [64.58.4.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 57F0343FBD for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:14:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 79361 invoked by uid 1002); 20 Oct 2003 16:13:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.4.1.5?) (64.58.1.252) by smtp.mho.net with SMTP; 20 Oct 2003 16:13:59 -0000 Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 10:15:36 -0600 (MDT) From: Scott Long X-X-Sender: scottl@pooker.samsco.home To: David Malone In-Reply-To: <20031020095412.F49719@pooker.samsco.home> Message-ID: <20031020101425.H49719@pooker.samsco.home> References: <200310200848.aa99929@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> <20031020095412.F49719@pooker.samsco.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: "Alan L. Cox" cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/streams streams.csrc/sys/kernkern_descrip.csrc/sys/opencrypto cryptodev.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:14:02 -0000 On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, Scott Long wrote: > On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, David Malone wrote: > > > > This reminds me that we still hold Giant around pipe(2) because it isn't > > > > declared MPSAFE in the syscall table. Is this still necessary? > > > > > I've been suspicious of this too, and I was hoping that you would have > > > an answer. Can we go ahead and correct this? > > > > I think we may need to check the calling of pipeclose() in pipe(), > > but as this is only done in an error case, it is probably safe enough > > to just grab Giant for that. (The mac_* calls may need to be checked > > too). > > pipeclose() seems to have some concept of locking, though I don't know > what the implications are of it saying, 'gee, the mutex on this pipe was > never initialized, so I just won't worry about locking.' Towards the > end of pipeclose() Giant is acquired, though that action is likely no > longer needed either. Nix that last part, I was looking at a stale file. pipeclose() does not explicitely grab Gaint. Scott