From owner-cvs-all  Wed Nov 29 10:52:44 2000
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id CC50537B400; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:52:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from bright@localhost)
	by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id eATIqe424475;
	Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:52:40 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:52:39 -0800
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_mutex.c
Message-ID: <20001129105239.N8051@fw.wintelcom.net>
References: <200011291841.eATIfJL20744@freefall.freebsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <200011291841.eATIfJL20744@freefall.freebsd.org>; from jhb@FreeBSD.org on Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 10:41:19AM -0800
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

* John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> [001129 10:41] wrote:
> jhb         2000/11/29 10:41:19 PST
> 
>   Modified files:
>     sys/kern             kern_mutex.c 
>   Log:
>   Use an atomic operation with an appropriate memory barrier when releasing
>   a contested sleep mutex in the case that at least two processes are blocked
>   on the contested mutex.

You remeber the fiasco with the MPlock Matt Dillon went through, are
you sure that we perform barriers when releasing locks on archs that
have loosely ordered memory models?

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message