Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:15:04 +0000 (GMT) From: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net> To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: libc_r locking... why? Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0106290112060.1425-100000@www.everquick.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Please pardon the cross-posting; I'd rather keep responses on whichever list is more appropriate. Why are bind(2), accept(2), kevent(2), etc. wrapped in libc_r? I thought that the spl() calls prevented kernel recursion in the current SMP system, and that a mutex handled reentrance in SMPng. [Please correct me if/where I am mistaken.] I can understand things like malloc(3), lseek(2), read(2), and write(2) being serialized, but I'm confused about [some of the other] syscall wrappers. Can somebody please elaborate, or direct me to a reference? Big TIA, Eddy --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. EverQuick Internet Division Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita/(Inter)national Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com> To: blacklist@brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.20.0106290112060.1425-100000>