From owner-p4-projects  Fri May 10  9:48:59 2002
Delivered-To: p4-projects@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 32767)
	id 611C637B405; Fri, 10 May 2002 09:48:52 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: perforce@freebsd.org
Received: from 12-234-96-171.client.attbi.com (12-234-96-171.client.attbi.com [12.234.96.171])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74C4837B401
	for <perforce@freebsd.org>; Fri, 10 May 2002 09:48:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 12-234-96-171.client.attbi.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 402ACA900; Fri, 10 May 2002 09:50:40 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 09:50:40 -0700
From: Jonathan Mini <mini@freebsd.org>
To: Jake Burkholder <jake@locore.ca>
Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 11120 for review
Message-ID: <20020510095040.I43682@stylus.haikugeek.com>
References: <200205101530.g4AFUn510685@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020510123716.D2566@locore.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <20020510123716.D2566@locore.ca>; from jake@locore.ca on Fri, May 10, 2002 at 12:37:16PM -0400
Sender: owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <p4-projects.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20p4-projects>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20p4-projects>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Jake Burkholder [jake@locore.ca] wrote :

> Apparently, On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 08:30:49AM -0700,
> 	Jonathan Mini said words to the effect of;
> 
> > http://people.freebsd.org/~peter/p4db/chv.cgi?CH=11120
> > 
> > Change 11120 by mini@mini_stylus on 2002/05/10 08:30:36
> > 
> > 	Give UMA control over thread allocation and caching:
> > 	
> > 	  [ ... ]
> 
> I'm not sure that using the uma callouts for all of this is safe.

What specifically do you think is dangerous?

> > +	mtx_lock_spin(&sched_lock);
> > +
> > +	mtx_unlock_spin(&sched_lock);
> 
> ???

*rofl* I can't believe that. Already fixed. Dunce cap for me. ;)

> > +	td = (struct thread *)mem;
> > +	pmap_dispose_thread(td);
> > +	vm_object_deallocate(td->td_kstack_obj);
> > +	cached_threads--;	/* XXXSMP */
> > +	allocated_threads--;	/* XXXSMP */
> > +}
> 
> These pmap and vm_object calls might sleep, and are called with the uma
> zone locked.
> 

Hmm, that's not good.

> Almost all of the new code you added looks like its indented 4 spaces,
> which should be tabs  :)

From style(9):

     Indentation is an 8 character tab.  Second level indents are four spaces.

.. I must have misread that. What are second level indents, then?


-- 
Jonathan Mini <mini@freebsd.org>
http://www.haikugeek.com

"He who is not aware of his ignorance will be only misled by his knowledge."
                                                        -- Richard Whatley

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe p4-projects" in the body of the message