rdivacky at freebsd.org
Wed Jan 28 14:07:37 PST 2009
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 03:21:17PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 January 2009 2:33:18 pm Roman Divacky wrote:
> > hi
> > we dont need Giant to be held for sysctl_ctx_init/SYSCTL_ADD_*, right?
> Ugh, it looks like the sysctl tree locking is woefully inadequate, so we
> aren't quite ready for this yet.
what do you mean? should all sysctl_ctx_init/SYSCTL_ADD_* consumers lock
Giant? I didnt not find a single one (except the scsi stuff) that locks
can you explain? thnx
More information about the freebsd-current