In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Malone writes: >On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 10:18:43PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> At one point we have to say "Well, the locks we have above are solid, >> but we need to drop Giant below here" but if Witness sees a >> PICKUP_GIANT() as an acquisition of Giant, rather than as a >> resumption of Giant, this clearly does not work. > >Wouldn't the risk of deadlock be real, even if it is only a resumption >of Giant? I guess another option is to drop all the locks that are >held and reqcquire all of them in the right order...
There is no risk at the point where I drop Giant (as far as I have been able to work out). Dropping all the locks would not work, because it is the "other" locks held which make dropping Giant safe. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
