From owner-freebsd-current Mon Feb 11 19:12:16 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from newman2.bestweb.net (newman2.bestweb.net [209.94.102.67]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC00437B4B2 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 18:17:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from okeeffe.bestweb.net (okeefe.bestweb.net [209.94.100.110]) by newman2.bestweb.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D1BE232E8; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:17:03 -0500 (EST) Received: by okeeffe.bestweb.net (Postfix, from userid 0) id EDFC79F2D9; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:12:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 10:16:26 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: Terry Lambert Subject: Re: ucred for threads Cc: Julian Elischer , current@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20020212021204.EDFC79F2D9@okeeffe.bestweb.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 08-Feb-02 Terry Lambert wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: >> No, an unlocked compare is _not_ ok. What if the p_ucred pointer was >> changed >> on some other processor by another thread from this processor? > > I saw your response to Julian... I understand the concern, > but I think it's unfounded. Let me explain. Yes, it's an acceptable race to lose as you say. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message