On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 09:54:39AM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote: > hi > > currently in exit1() we call acct_process() with Giant held. > I looked at the code and I think this is because of tty need > for Giant locking. Because of this we have to release process limit > in a separate PROC_LOCK()/UNLOCK() block. > > my just-to-look-at patch does this > > 1) moves the acct_process() in exit1() out of Giant locked block (upward) > 2) acquires Giant in the acct_process() around tty handling > 3) moves the p->p_limit to a different PROC_LOCK/UNLOCK block (upward) > > the result is saving 2 proc mtx operations in exit1() > > can you look at it and tell me if its correct or wrong or something like that? > > if it's correct is it worth committing? saving two mtx operations is a nice > thing :)
erm... two bugs ;) "saving two mtx operations..." in the typical case of accounting NOT being enabled. and forgot to show the patch ;) it's here www.vlakno.cz/~rdivacky/kern_acct.patch _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
