From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Jan 21 17:11:12 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA21677 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:11:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA21632 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:11:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert@usr09.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA18419; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:11:05 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr09.primenet.com(206.165.6.209) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpd018395; Wed Jan 21 18:10:59 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA17398; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 18:10:55 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199801220110.SAA17398@usr09.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Locking on disk slice I/O--yes, no or how? To: michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 01:10:54 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, grog@lemis.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Michael Hancock" at Jan 22, 98 10:02:14 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > > Only if you have an intention collision would you resort to a TSM > > call to resolve the collision. For the most part, it's non-blocking. > > TSM doesn't necessarily mean it's non-blocking. It just means that a > vnode you're about to modify won't suddenly become a mbuf. Intent locking > seems similar in this respect. Maybe I'm being a smartass, but since John > said TSM instead of NBS it leaves it open to speculation a wee bit. > > Things sure are getting interesting in current! I was thinking of Test-and-set/Semaphore/Mutex. You would use non-blocking intention modes, and then block on a T, S, or M if there were a conflicting intention. I guess he could have been talking about "Type Specific Memory", though... but in the context of locking? 8-). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.