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 — 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>