Subject: Re: newlock
To: Jason Thorpe <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/11/2006 16:09:10
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 11:55:43AM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> On Sep 11, 2006, at 11:07 AM, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> >Note, we have a potential issue here as well. In addition to the =20
> >of a locking order, if both locks are driver locks (have IPL cookies),
> >then we have to make sure we grab them in the right order.
> Not an issue due to the use of splraiseipl().
You're right. I've stared at it, and I think you're right, as long as we=20
raise ipl before grabbing the mutex (in the implementation).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----