>
> > On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Iain Hibbert wrote:
> >
> > > I think the attached method is cleaner (is untried,
> > > not sure if its complete or the locking is ok?)
> >
> > In fact I think that locking was wrong, since
> > CALLOUT_LOCK() involves splsched() and tsleep/wakeup is
> then prohibited.
>
> how does it prohibit tsleep/wakeup?

spl(9) says so ..

iain