svn commit: r252209 - in head: share/man/man9 sys/kern sys/sys

[Andre Oppermann]

On 25.06.2013 20:44, John Baldwin wrote:
> Author: jhb
> Date: Tue Jun 25 18:44:15 2013
> New Revision: 252209
> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/252209
>
> Log:
>    Several improvements to rmlock(9).  Many of these are based on patches
>    provided by Isilon.
>    - Add an rm_assert() supporting various lock assertions similar to other
>      locking primitives.  Because rmlocks track readers the assertions are
>      always fully accurate unlike rw_assert() and sx_assert().
>    - Flesh out the lock class methods for rmlocks to support sleeping via
>      condvars and rm_sleep() (but only while holding write locks), rmlock
>      details in 'show lock' in DDB, and the lc_owner method used by
>      dtrace.
>    - Add an internal destroyed cookie so that API functions can assert
>      that an rmlock is not destroyed.
>    - Make use of rm_assert() to add various assertions to the API (e.g.
>      to assert locks are held when an unlock routine is called).
>    - Give RM_SLEEPABLE locks their own lock class and always use the
>      rmlock's own lock_object with WITNESS.
>    - Use THREAD_NO_SLEEPING() / THREAD_SLEEPING_OK() to disallow sleeping
>      while holding a read lock on an rmlock.

Thanks!

Would it make sense to move struct rm_queue from struct pcpu itself to
using DPCPU as a next step?

>    Submitted by:	andre

Actually these were only relayed by me and came from Max Laier / Stephan
Uphoff.  So all fame to them.

>    Obtained from:	EMC/Isilon

-- 
Andre