Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 03:16:10 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Dieter BSD <dieterbsd@engineer.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Giant lock gone? (was: Re: ...focus, longevity, and lifecycle) Message-ID: <4F17FB7A.802@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20120119005820.218250@gmx.com> References: <20120119005820.218250@gmx.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/18/2012 16:58, Dieter BSD wrote: >> The original goal for 5.0 was to completely remove the Giant lock (and >> do other cool SMP-related stuff). Eventually it was realized that this >> was too big a goal to fully accomplish in 5.0 (albeit too late in the >> process) and the goal was changed to do the basic framework for the new >> SMP model; and lay the groundwork for "some things run under Giant for >> now, and we'll remove it from them ASAP." That actually turned out to >> last through 6, making 7 the realization of what 5.0 was supposed to be. > > So you are saying that the Giant lock was completely removed in 7.0? > > 8.2 says: > > atkbd0: [GIANT-LOCKED] > psm0: [GIANT-LOCKED] Yeah, I think nitpicking minor details about Giant still being used on non-critical drivers is definitely the key to solving the problems that face FreeBSD today. I could have more thoroughly clarified the reality of the when/where/how of Giant but it really wasn't central to my point. -- It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short. Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F17FB7A.802>