Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 13:47:30 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: split out patch Message-ID: <XFMail.20030203134730.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0302010256220.51808-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01-Feb-2003 Julian Elischer wrote: > > I'm working on backing out david's patch. > > Part of his megacommit was a patch that should ahve been separatly > handled. > > I have split it out.. > Can people have a look at it and see if it makes sense. > > http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/lock.diff > > basically locks need to be per thread but were per process. > > Can we just use a thread* for this? > I think so but I wonder why it wasn't a proc* before.. I guess it was pids before because pids are easier to correlate with processes in a ps(1) listing. It looks good to me though. The only thing I saw (minor nit) is that the assignment of LK_NOPROC to the lp->lockholder doesn't need a (struct thread *) cast because LK_NOPROC already has the cast in its definition. Other than that it looks ok to me. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20030203134730.jhb>