Re: Passive serialization support in the pool allocator

[Paul Goyette <paul%whooppee.com@localhost>]

I'm no expert here, but I did review.

LGTM

On Tue, 21 Dec 2021, Jason Thorpe wrote:

> An #ifdef that Taylor added in the new DRM code was bugging me,
> because a similar situation already existed in the NetBSD kernel,
> whereby the type stability of a object's backing memory (the iam
> existentium case being LWPs) was required for a passively-serialized
> weak reference to work.  The LWP pool cache had a hack to handle it,
> and the hack was propagated to the new DRM code under an #ifdef
> __NetBSD__.
>
> I initially fixed this by adding a pre-destruct callback that could be
> optionally set for a pool cache, but after further discussion, it
> seemed like having direct knowledge of passive serialization
> synchronization points in the allocator was a better solution, so here
> is a diff that implements it for you review.
>
> 	https://www.netbsd.org/~thorpej/pool-pser-diff.txt
>
> Please comment ASAP, because I want to ride a kernel version bump.


Yeah, we're getting rather close to 9.99.MAX   :)


+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| Paul Goyette       | PGP Key fingerprint:     | E-mail addresses:    |
| (Retired)          | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul%whooppee.com@localhost    |
| Software Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette%netbsd.org@localhost  |
| & Network Engineer |                          | pgoyette99%gmail.com@localhost |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+