From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Mar 13 18:53:47 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA09528 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 18:53:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from dg-rtp.dg.com (dg-rtp.rtp.dg.com [128.222.1.2]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA09351 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 18:50:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by dg-rtp.dg.com (5.4R3.10/dg-rtp-v02) id AA26495; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 21:50:03 -0500 Received: from ponds by dg-rtp.dg.com.rtp.dg.com; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 21:50 EST Received: from lakes.water.net (lakes [10.0.0.3]) by ponds.water.net (8.8.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA13695 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 21:27:49 -0500 (EST) Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.water.net (8.8.3/8.6.9) id VAA00748 for freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 21:33:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 21:33:57 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas David Rivers Message-Id: <199703140233.VAA00748@lakes.water.net> To: ponds!freefall.cdrom.com!freebsd-hackers Subject: dscheck() and the processor level? Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I was just wondering - dscheck() [in subr_diskslice.c] does a lot of stuff with a struct buf [notably, setting it's physical block number.] I don't think it's the case that this needs to be at splbio(), but could someone take a gander at that and let me know? [I'm a little fuzzy on just exactly when you should set the processor level to "bio" - just what are we protecting when we do that?] - Thanks - - Dave R. -