Re: SPL NOT ZERO ON SYSCALL ENTRY

[Matt Thomas <matt%3am-software.com@localhost>]

On Mar 11, 2008, at 5:46 PM, Bill Stouder-Studenmund wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:46:07AM +0100, Matthias Drochner wrote:
> > wrstuden%NetBSD.org@localhost said:
> > > My guess is the problem was a missing splx() in an error-handling
> > > case.
> >
> > That's what I'd also had assumed if the reason was
> > "not lowered in syscall exit". But this was on entry...
>
> Thinking about it, I think we went with mutexes that hold SPL  
> state. So
> what might be happening is that we're releasing SPL mutexes (that's  
> not
> the name, but I'm forgetting what exact term we used) in an order  
> opposite
> of the one in which we took them. ??

Except mutexes don't work that way.

spl is only dropped (to the old spl) once *all* mutex all released.
So order of release doesn't matter.