Subject: Re: Removing p_nras from struct proc
To: David Laight <>
From: Jaromir Dolecek <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 11/04/2003 11:03:35
David Laight wrote:
> No - read it carefully. eg for:

Yeah, classic comparison :) It's right, indeed.

> There are (will be) places where proc structure fields need protecting
> against accesses by other processes [1].  So calling the field p_lock
> (because is locks proc structure fields) is better.

Right. Single p_lock would be proper then. Apparently e.g. the RAS
lock guards only specific subset of struct proc (the ras list), but
I guess it'd be safer to have single lock for whole structure.

Jaromir Dolecek <>  
-=- We should be mindful of the potential goal, but as the Buddhist -=-
-=- masters say, ``You may notice during meditation that you        -=-
-=- sometimes levitate or glow.   Do not let this distract you.''   -=-