Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 23:12:51 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu> Cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: INTR_MPSAFE network drivers Message-ID: <3D48D163.2213890@mindspring.com> References: <XFMail.20020729175342.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20020730000345.E0D9F2A7D6@canning.wemm.org> <15686.48913.150407.307190@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20020730171226.GA26599@cs.rice.edu> <15688.22002.772933.316104@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20020801021235.GD9934@cs.rice.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alan Cox wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 05:26:10PM -0400, Andrew Gallatin wrote: > > > > For what its worth, this *seems* to work OK on a non-WITNESS, > > non-INVARIENTs kernel. > > That's what I would expect. The difficult problem that we'll have > with kmem_malloc() and friends stems from legacy drivers that rely on > Giant, not a properly locked driver. If a legacy driver sleeps because > kmem_malloc() is unable to acquire the mb_map or kernel_map lock, they > may wake up to an inconsistent state. Right now, requiring Giant in > the top half of the kernel to call kmem_malloc() et al. prevents this. Why the heck is a driver calling this anyway? Why the heck is there *anything* in the driver that needs a lock that's not implicit in the fact that it's called to process an interrupt? -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D48D163.2213890>