Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 17:08:42 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r184199 - in head/sys: kern sys Message-ID: <200811041708.42804.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200810230755.m9N7tceu051313@svn.freebsd.org> References: <200810230755.m9N7tceu051313@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 23 October 2008 03:55:38 am David Xu wrote: > Author: davidxu > Date: Thu Oct 23 07:55:38 2008 > New Revision: 184199 > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184199 > > Log: > Actually, for signal and thread suspension, extra process spin lock is > unnecessary, the normal process lock and thread lock are enough. The > spin lock is still needed for process and thread exiting to mimic > single sched_lock. With thread_lock() it is not safe to drop a mutex while holding thread_lock(). Instead, it can result in a deadlock. Peter has a test case that deadlocks due to these changes. Please revert this. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200811041708.42804.jhb>