From owner-p4-projects  Sat May  4  0:20:28 2002
Delivered-To: p4-projects@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 32767)
	id 8B67237B41A; Sat,  4 May 2002 00:20:11 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: perforce@freebsd.org
Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 47B7537B41A; Sat,  4 May 2002 00:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from InterJet.elischer.org ([12.232.206.8])
          by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP
          id <20020504072008.HZQA9799.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@InterJet.elischer.org>;
          Sat, 4 May 2002 07:20:08 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1])
	by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA86285;
	Sat, 4 May 2002 00:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 00:19:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To: Jonathan Mini <mini@freebsd.org>
Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 10740 for review
In-Reply-To: <20020503232550.H81190@stylus.haikugeek.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0205040015400.86274-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <p4-projects.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20p4-projects>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20p4-projects>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG



On Fri, 3 May 2002, Jonathan Mini wrote:

> Julian Elischer [julian@elischer.org] wrote :
> 
> > BTW
> > warning warning...
> > I redid fork() fo rdiff-reduction..
> > it MAY EXPLODE.
> > I have not checked the locking logic, just done the mechanical
> > bits.
> 
> Yeah, I saw that. Right now I'm going through and double-checking
> everything.

I know that the call to thread_single() will panic in a KSE process
because it does an assert that the process is locked, and in the new
version it isn't.
 I was going to ask jhb to look at it and decide where the locking would
best be fiddled to extend it to cover this call..

I'm not absolutly sure yet that I got all the added bits from theold one.. 
that's the problem with the old one.. it was so big a change that it
obfuscated teh functional diffs to the point where even I am not sure
what they were.. :-(



> 
> -- 
> Jonathan Mini <mini@freebsd.org>
> http://www.haikugeek.com
> 
> "He who is not aware of his ignorance will be only misled by his knowledge."
>                                                         -- Richard Whatley
> 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe p4-projects" in the body of the message