Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 12:32:20 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: "Alan L. Cox" <alc@imimic.com> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Alan Cox <alc@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/nfsclient nfs_vnops.c Message-ID: <20030102203220.GL26140@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <3E14985A.35AB67F4@imimic.com> References: <XFMail.20030102124236.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <3E14985A.35AB67F4@imimic.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Alan L. Cox <alc@imimic.com> [030102 11:52] wrote: > > In general, yes. The vnode interlock is, however, a special case. Any > form of malloc() or free() while holding a vnode interlock will cause a > reversal. This stems from the intertwining of vm objects and vnodes. > > Regards, > Alan > > P.S. If someone knows a good place to document this, please do. I think a mention in the manpages for malloc(9) and vnode(9) would be appropriate. -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030102203220.GL26140>