On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:33:56PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Diff below change the usage of `sb_flags' and `sb_flagsintr'. The
> former will be protected by the socket lock while the latter will
> be using atomic operations.
I like this plan.
> @@ -381,17 +381,18 @@ sbunlock(struct socket *so, struct sockb
> void
> sowakeup(struct socket *so, struct sockbuf *sb)
> {
> - KERNEL_ASSERT_LOCKED();
> soassertlocked(so);
>
> - selwakeup(&sb->sb_sel);
> - sb->sb_flagsintr &= ~SB_SEL;
> - if (sb->sb_flagsintr & SB_WAIT) {
> - sb->sb_flagsintr &= ~SB_WAIT;
> + sb->sb_flags &= ~SB_SEL;
> + if (sb->sb_flags & SB_WAIT) {
> + sb->sb_flags &= ~SB_WAIT;
> wakeup(&sb->sb_cc);
> }
> + KERNEL_LOCK();
> if (so->so_state & SS_ASYNC)
> csignal(so->so_pgid, SIGIO, so->so_siguid, so->so_sigeuid);
> + selwakeup(&sb->sb_sel);
> + KERNEL_UNLOCK();
> }
Why do you move the selwakeup() after the csignal() ?
> @@ -340,6 +342,7 @@ fifo_poll(void *v)
> wso->so_snd.sb_flagsintr |= SB_SEL;
> }
> }
> + sounlock(s);
> return (revents);
> }
Here you missed to convert sb_flagsintr |= SB_SEL to sb_flags.
And in filt_fifowdetach() is still a sb_flags &= ~SB_KNOTE.
bluhm
