Matthew Ahrens wrote: > Neil Perrin wrote: >> >> Ricardo M. Correia wrote: >>> Ricardo M. Correia wrote: >>>> boolean_t need_lock = !RW_LOCK_HELD(&dp->dp_config_rwlock); >>>> >>>> if (need_lock) >>>> rw_enter(&dp->dp_config_rwlock, RW_READER); >>>> >>> Maybe I posted to soon. >>> Am I right that this specific code (in dsl_dataset.c) would work >>> correctly if RW_LOCK_HELD() returned true if *another* thread is >>> holding the lock as a reader? >> >> Yes this looks like a bug to me as well. > > This is not a bug, it is the designed behavior. To tell if this > specific thread is holding the lock for reader would require a > performance hit (eg, see rrwlock.c behavior when rr_writer_wanted is set). > > --matt
- I'm confused then. The dp_config_rwlock lock must be held as it's asserted in dsl_prop_get_ds_locked() However, the lock can be dropped immediately after the test dsl_dataset_open_obj() as it only checks if anyone is holding it - not just the caller. Am I missing something? Neil.
