Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 10:20:15 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG, smp@FreeBSD.ORG, jhb@FreeBSD.ORG, jake@FreeBSD.ORG, tanimura@FreeBSD.ORG, alc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Need help fixing lock ordering with filedesc, proc and pipe. Message-ID: <20030103182015.GB33821@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <200301031805.h03I5Gt8064163@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20030103030805.GS26140@elvis.mu.org> <200301031805.h03I5Gt8064163@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> [030103 10:05] wrote: > Hmm. There seem to be multiple issues here but would defering the > psigio also be a workable solution? That is, simply add a flag to > the filedesc and return and the caller (or his caller) is responsible > for checking the flag and calling psigio in a more controlled situation. > This way sigio can be initiated deep in the code without any worries. No. Not every object has a filedesc in front of it. Think of a kernel subsystem that allocates a socket directly via socreate. -- -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 freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030103182015.GB33821>