From owner-freebsd-fs Fri Feb 27 22:19:56 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA27891 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Fri, 27 Feb 1998 22:19:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA27886 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 1998 22:19:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from toor@dyson.iquest.net) Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA03691; Sat, 28 Feb 1998 01:19:31 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from toor) Message-Id: <199802280619.BAA03691@dyson.iquest.net> Subject: Re: syncer / SMP question In-Reply-To: <199802280604.XAA20809@usr05.primenet.com> from Terry Lambert at "Feb 28, 98 06:04:10 am" To: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 1998 01:19:31 -0500 (EST) Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, eivind@yes.no, jlemon@americantv.com, fs@FreeBSD.ORG From: "John S. Dyson" Reply-To: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert said: > > > Interlocks are for very short-term locks and for locking the aquisition > > > of full locks. > > > > > One rule-of-thumb is never to block (tsleep) when you have an interlock. > > This would make a good assert for a kernel compiled with debugging > turned on... 8-). > Yep, except, the low level lockmgr still has to, but that can be hidden. I can imagine the possibility of blocking, but that could greatly complicate things. The usage of locks has to be very disciplined until we can agree on a schema. The scheme that you outlined to me is very reasonable. -- John | Never try to teach a pig to sing, dyson@freebsd.org | it just makes you look stupid, jdyson@nc.com | and it irritates the pig. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message