On Tuesday, September 21, 2010 12:53:56 pm Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > Err, I don't think _mtx_lock_sleep() is guarded in that fashion? I have an > > old patch to do that but have never committed it. If we want that we should > > probably change rwlocks and sxlocks to have also not block when panicstr is > > set. > > Seems to me you are backing into interesting territory here- getting a > bit more like Solaris. > > If you *do* do this, then you really *do* need to stop all other CPUs > when you panic, or else it's likely you'll double panic more often than not.
Yes, I don't dispute this. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"