On 5/19/16 12:12 PM, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 09:31:47AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
It seems like it should be the opposite, the DROP_GIANTs should be
turned into mtx_assert(&Giant, MA_NOTOWNED) as giant is removed from the
tree.
Meaning Giant should be pushed further back until it is eliminated.
Doing as this patch proposes hides that we still have callers holding
Giant which is not good.
Did you read the third paragraph of my email ?
OK, and why is thread0 needing Giant for so long?
FWIW, the assumed model of the kernel locking which must be in somebody
mind when talking about 'pushing back Giant' is not true for last 5-6
years for our kernel in general, and for the VFS in particular.
OK, makes sense, still would prefer to have assertions that don't allow
mistakes to creep in. FreeBSD's assertions on locking and VFS make it
much easier to develop under.
-Alfred
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-geom
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
