Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:35:25 +0200 From: Bartosz Fabianowski <freebsd@chillt.de> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net> Subject: Re: Is there some implicit locking of device methods? Message-ID: <4DB81B9D.1070306@chillt.de> In-Reply-To: <20110427153012.GX48734@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <4DB695DB.1080505@chillt.de> <20110426124403.GQ48734@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4DB76085.4000402@chillt.de> <201104271019.31844.jhb@freebsd.org> <4DB818A3.1020104@chillt.de> <20110427153012.GX48734@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The global kind of last close is communicated to cdev by calling cdevsw > close method. It is known to be not quite reliable, and esp. hard in > relation to the forced unmounts of devfs mount points. > > The close of file (when no other file descriptors referencing the file are > left) ends in cdevpriv destructor call. Thanks. That confirms my understanding of the mechanism after John's clarification. I will move my code to the cdevpriv destructor and do away with the d_close method entirely. - Bartosz
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4DB81B9D.1070306>