From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct 19 22:11:29 2004
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 56B2916A4CE; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:11:29 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mail.vicor-nb.com (bigwoop.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 3055D43D46; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:11:29 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from julian@elischer.org)
Received: from elischer.org (julian.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.97])
	by mail.vicor-nb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 0D84D7A403; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:11:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <41759110.6010005@elischer.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:11:28 -0700
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030516
X-Accept-Language: en, hu
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andre Oppermann <andre@FreeBSD.org>
References: <200410191513.i9JFDUbf072176@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<417532A2.9000901@errno.com> <41753522.1E39FEAE@freebsd.org>
	<200410192329.46723.max@love2party.net> <41758B35.D5340AEA@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <41758B35.D5340AEA@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: Max Laier <max@love2party.net>
cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org
cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
cc: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys protosw.h src/sys/kern
	uipc_domain.cuipc_socket2.c
X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:11:29 -0000



Andre Oppermann wrote:

>
>  
>
>>Another point: If you really want to keep the possibility to remove a
>>protocol, you have to introduce some busy counter that pervents removal while
>>the kernel is inside a protocol function. This has to be handled by the
>>protocol itself, but it has to be taken care of somehow.
>>


each protocol array entry could have either a mutex or a refcount or both..

>>    
>>
>
>Yes, the protocol has to be able to handle its own unloading.  I have
>documented that fact.  If a protocol in unable to do so it should simply
>refuse any unload attempts with EBUSY.
>
>  
>