From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 30 09:30:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848E316A7F7 for ; Tue, 30 May 2006 09:30:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net) Received: from transport.cksoft.de (transport.cksoft.de [62.111.66.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B545543D5C for ; Tue, 30 May 2006 09:30:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net) Received: from transport.cksoft.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by transport.cksoft.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D6D31FF9A7; Tue, 30 May 2006 11:30:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: by transport.cksoft.de (Postfix, from userid 66) id E77631FF905; Tue, 30 May 2006 11:30:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net (maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net [10.111.66.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 412BD4448D6; Tue, 30 May 2006 09:29:37 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 09:29:36 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" X-X-Sender: bz@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net To: Blue In-Reply-To: <447C0DFF.8050500@zyxel.com.tw> Message-ID: <20060530092855.B98242@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <447C0DFF.8050500@zyxel.com.tw> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS cksoft-s20020300-20031204bz on transport.cksoft.de Cc: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Critical section in in6_setsockaddr and in6_setpeeraddr X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 09:30:17 -0000 On Tue, 30 May 2006, Blue wrote: Hi, > In in6_setpeeraddr and in6_setsockaddr in in6_pcb.c, the critical section > still uses legacy splnet() and splx(). However, the splnet() and splx() have > been redefined as empty function. Don't we need to rewrite the part with > INP_LOCK(inp); .... INP_UNLOCK(inp);? that's what is in HEAD already. -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT