Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 02:08:53 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> Cc: "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org>, current@FreeBSD.org, net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: new zero copy sockets patches available Message-ID: <3CE61A25.61C789FA@mindspring.com> References: <20020517233950.A36169@panzer.kdm.org> <20020518060255.GN20683@elvis.mu.org> <20020518003046.A36510@panzer.kdm.org> <20020518090032.GO20683@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Kenneth D. Merry <ken@kdm.org> [020517 23:31] wrote: > > The problem here is that the mutex needs to be initialized before I can > > acquire it, and there's going to be a race between checking to see > > whether it has been initialized and actually initializing it. > > > ... > > Suggestions? > > *slaps forhead* > > Probably a SYSINIT? God, it's annoying that a statically declared mutex is not defacto initialized. Yeah, I understand the "witness" crap (if it's there); that doesn't make it any less annoying. Actually, a linker set (not a SYSINIT) could fix that... you would still need one sysinit to do the linkage of the statically declared structures, but it's at least doable. -- Terry 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?3CE61A25.61C789FA>