Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 02 Jun 2007 21:06:56 +0200
From:      Attilio Rao <attilio@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Rui Paulo <rpaulo@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: PERFORCE change 120788 for review
Message-ID:  <4661BFD0.1080107@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <200706021756.l52Huq9A049371@repoman.freebsd.org>
References:  <200706021756.l52Huq9A049371@repoman.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rui Paulo wrote:
> http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=120788
> 
> Change 120788 by rpaulo@rpaulo_epsilon on 2007/06/02 17:55:58
> 
> 	Add locking.	
> 
> Affected files ...

Ah, but it seems you don't use a "fast" interrupt handler, so you should 
not use a spinlock... spinlocks should only be used in fast interrupt 
handlers, otherwise you bring up all the disvantages of the model...

Attilio




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4661BFD0.1080107>