Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 11:31:09 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Acquiring a mtx after an sx lock Message-ID: <48A9BFED.604@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20080818162411.GA77460@sandvine.com> References: <bc2d970808180814ue926d43s7966b36ffa3c9699@mail.gmail.com> <200808181754.18812.max@love2party.net> <bc2d970808180902h1ded9bcbp494d276ede0eeed@mail.gmail.com> <20080818162411.GA77460@sandvine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ed Maste wrote: > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:02:56PM -0400, Ryan Stone wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Max Laier <max@love2party.net> wrote: >> >>> On Monday 18 August 2008 17:14:01 Ryan Stone wrote: >>>> Are there any problems acquiring a sleep mutex after acquiring an sx >>> lock? >>>> man 9 locking says that you can't, but doesn't provide any reasons. >>> [...] >>> >>> Where does it say so? The interaction table clearly shows: [...] > > Ahh, it seems ups' commit of rmlocks changed the "You have: sx_lock, > You want: Slp_mtx" case from no to ok (in r173444). hmmm you know, I'm not sure what the correct answer is.. I thought rw locks were mutex compatible but sx locks were NOT.. > > -Ed > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48A9BFED.604>