Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:53:44 -0600
From:      Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>
To:        Stephan Uphoff <ups@tree.com>
Cc:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: splxxx level?
Message-ID:  <4133BE08.1070405@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <1093909301.61235.410.camel@palm.tree.com>
References:  <20040830.102606.130865377.imp@bsdimp.com> <20040830.111428.56562495.imp@bsdimp.com> <4133682D.3000403@freebsd.org> <20040830.120124.28086427.imp@bsdimp.com> <41336DC8.7080808@freebsd.org> <Pine.LNX.4.60.0408301548440.4347@athena> <1093909301.61235.410.camel@palm.tree.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Stephan Uphoff wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Disclaimer: I never developed for FreeBSD 4.X
> and might be a few miles off target...
> 
> I vaguely recall seeing that vinum issues
> new strategy calls to member disks
> in the context of a buffer's biodone callback.
> 
> Because of this mixing local and network 
> disks in a vinum set could cause the network 
> disk's strategy to be called in the the 
> interrupt context of the local disk controller.
> ( And the other way round?)
> 
> 

Interesting observation, and I don't have a good
answer for that.  I guess for now it'll be prudent
to avoid mixing subsystems like this.

Scott



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4133BE08.1070405>