Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 17:05:44 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <netchild@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, rdivacky@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/compat/linux linux_misc.c Message-ID: <20060819170544.118d2c2b@Magellan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20060818184107.B47942@fledge.watson.org> References: <200608172121.k7HLLUY5095480@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060818184107.B47942@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> (Fri, 18 Aug 2006 18:47:12 +0100 (BST)):
>
> On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>
> > - protect td->td_proc->p_pid with the proc lock in linux_getpid
> > in the amd64 (= non i386) case [1]
>
> Is this necessary? In principle, td->td_proc is static for a live thread
> bound to a process (i.e., in a system call, which the current thread
> presumable is, as long as td == curthread), p_pid is static for a live process
> that isn't exiting (so in a system call is not generally exiting). The native
> FreeBSD getpid() only acquires the process lock when following p_pptr, since
> this can change during a system call (i.e., as a result of the parent dying,
> and the child being re-parented to init(8)).
Now that you tell me this, I have the impression that I have mixed up
p_pid with p_pptr here... I have to have a look at the code again.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
...and that is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped.
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060819170544.118d2c2b>