Re: Giant pushdown in kern_descrip.c rev 1.128

2003-06-17 Thread Don Lewis
On 17 Jun, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Don Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030617 13:06] wrote: >> On 17 Jun, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> > * Don Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030617 12:00] wrote: >> >> It's not legal to attempt to aquire Giant in fdrop_locked(), while >> >> FILE_LOCK() is held. The proble

Re: Giant pushdown in kern_descrip.c rev 1.128

2003-06-17 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Don Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030617 13:06] wrote: > On 17 Jun, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > * Don Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030617 12:00] wrote: > >> It's not legal to attempt to aquire Giant in fdrop_locked(), while > >> FILE_LOCK() is held. The problem is that FILE_LOCK uses the mutex pool,

Re: Giant pushdown in kern_descrip.c rev 1.128

2003-06-17 Thread Don Lewis
On 17 Jun, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Don Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030617 12:00] wrote: >> It's not legal to attempt to aquire Giant in fdrop_locked(), while >> FILE_LOCK() is held. The problem is that FILE_LOCK uses the mutex pool, >> which should only be used for leaf mutexes. >> >> It also

Re: Giant pushdown in kern_descrip.c rev 1.128

2003-06-17 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Don Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030617 12:00] wrote: > It's not legal to attempt to aquire Giant in fdrop_locked(), while > FILE_LOCK() is held. The problem is that FILE_LOCK uses the mutex pool, > which should only be used for leaf mutexes. > > It also looks like there is a potential for a lock