On Sun, 21 Feb 1999, Bruce Evans wrote:
> >parts of proc (p_vmspace etc.) For that matter, does any of
> >kern_exit.c:exit1()
> >need to be spl()d? It sure seems like it to me. Along with other parts of
> >kern_exit.c, and many other things having to do with refcnt's. Is it just my
> >paranoia, or have I got this spl concept correct?
>
> spl is for blocking interrupts. Process-related things shouldn't be and
> mostly aren't touched by interrupts.
>
> Bruce
>
But without an spl, couldn't multiple processes do Very Bad Things in a
partially shared proc context?
Brian Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___
gr...@unixhelp.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
http://www.freebsd.org/ _ __ ___ ____ | _ \__ \ |) |
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! _ __ ___ ____ _____ |___/___/___/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
