--wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 08:24:05AM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>=20
> On Jun 8, 2005, at 3:02 AM, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
>=20
> >If there's a way to make only parts of the kernel SMP-safe, I'd be =20
> >interested
> >in working on disks subsystems.
>=20
> You still need to fix everything at higher IPLs first, because as =20
> long as you could be interrupted by something that needs to take the =20
> kernel_lock, you could end up in a deadlock situation.

What I don't get is that when we're in the kernel, we grab the=20
kernel_lock, and when we're in an interrupt handler, we grab the=20
kernel_lock. How do we keep the two of those from deadlocking?

Take care,

Bill

--wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFCp82OWz+3JHUci9cRAp+YAJwMgOGa4Dlr6dS79szd07ilV8CDsgCfU3Qz
XLkO0QwwPzwII2Qt1doqR2g=
=vEff
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC--