Subject: Re: audio filter pipeline: is the device softc really needed?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Christos Zoulas <email@example.com>
Date: 06/28/2006 16:54:32
In article <200606281610.SAA0000032543@zel459.zel.kfa-juelich.de>,
Matthias Drochner <M.Drochner@fz-juelich.de> wrote:
>some weeks ago when we had a locking problem in the audio
>filter code I found that the device softc is passed around
>for no good reason. The locking stuff would indeed be much easier
>if a filter pipeline was just a thing of its own, not referring
>to pointers which might be volatile.
>I've done the change in my tree (patch appended), and havn't
>seen any problems for more than 2 months.
>Is this OK to commit?
looks ok to me.