Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 10:56:16 +0000 From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r264321 - head/sys/netinet Message-ID: <2775D53A-8728-4E8D-B53D-ADC00649D737@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201404101815.s3AIFZx3065541@svn.freebsd.org> References: <201404101815.s3AIFZx3065541@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10 Apr 2014, at 18:15 , John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > +/* Global timewait lock */ > +static VNET_DEFINE(struct rwlock, tw_lock); > +#define V_tw_lock VNET(tw_lock) Why do we virtualise individual locks now? Usually we only do for = those embedded into larger virtualised data structures? Does this align = with an independently virtualised data structure (in which case the lock = should be part of that)? /bz =97=20 Bjoern A. Zeeb ????????? ??? ??????? ??????: '??? ??? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????', ????????? ?????????, "??? ????? ?? ?????", ?.???
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2775D53A-8728-4E8D-B53D-ADC00649D737>