Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 24 Feb 2008 12:34:09 +0100
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: splimp()
Message-ID:  <47C15631.5020002@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080224110902.K25292@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <274346.34322.qm@web63914.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <47C14B0F.8050403@FreeBSD.org> <20080224110902.K25292@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> 
>> Barney Cordoba wrote:
>>> I'm porting some older software to 7.0 and I see that many of the 7.0 
>>> drivers use both locks and splimps() to protect code, particularly 
>>> the firewire driver. What cases would an splimp() be required?
>>
>> spl*() are NOPs that are only left behind in some code as a reminder 
>> of what mutual exclusion protections used to apply, mostly in cases 
>> where there has not been fine-grained locking applied to the code in 
>> question.  In some (most?) cases they serve no useful annotation 
>> purpose and should just be removed.  For newly written code they 
>> should be added.
> 
> I'm pretty sure you meant "should not be added" :-).

Er yes ;)

Kris




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47C15631.5020002>