Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 20:45:17 +0200 From: Fredrik Lindberg <fli+freebsd-current@shapeshifter.se> To: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, "Christian S. J. Peron" <csjp@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: panic: knlist locked, but should not be Message-ID: <44A965BD.70101@shapeshifter.se> In-Reply-To: <20060703181408.GB734@funkthat.com> References: <44A927AC.7080807@shapeshifter.se> <20060703181408.GB734@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > Why not drop the lock lines and keep the 0? As you said since it's > the same lock, locking it a bit later won't hurt... > A yes of course the locks can be dropped from filt_bpfdetach(), that's probably better. But bpfkqfilter() will have to keep its lock because it modifies data. The lines could also be swapped (releasing the lock before calling knlist_add) but that would just be stupid as the lock would be acquired again in knlist_add. Fredrik Lindberg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44A965BD.70101>