Re: Kernel crash w/o reason
From: John Baldwin (jhb_at_FreeBSD.org)
Date: 12/27/04
- Previous message: John Baldwin: "Re: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE"
- In reply to: Jan Engelhardt: "Re: Kernel crash w/o reason"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:38:11 -0500
On Friday 24 December 2004 07:13 am, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> What should I use instead? A semaphore?
> >
> >You shouldn't have unrelated kernel threads waiting for a user
> >process at all, so this sounds like a design problem, regardless
> >of which mutual exclusion primitive you use. (Bear in mind that I
> >haven't actually looked into what you're trying to do.) In any
> >case, you can always use mutexes to implement whatever other
> >synchronization mechanism you need.
>
> I wanted that the device can only be opened once, and holding a mutex while
> it is open seemed like a simple idea. (Since mtx_trylock() will then fail
> -- easy to implement.)
Use a flag in your softc and use a mutex to protect access to the flag.
-- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: John Baldwin: "Re: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE"
- In reply to: Jan Engelhardt: "Re: Kernel crash w/o reason"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|