Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh_at_gmail.com> wrote: > > I tend to agree with you. Since that sndstat_busy() isn't enough, how > > about we acquire the entire sndstat so nobody can monkey with it (as the > > proposed / attached diff) and at the same time avoiding this LOR > > message. It seems much better rather than locking sndstat after > > sndstat_busy() and much of pcm_unregister() procedures, only to find out > > that somebody acquire it within that moment. > > > > I didn't try the patch but it looks good to me. :-) > If you have more time would you please fix race in sndstat_open()? > > Minor note : I think it is better to use sx_xunlock ranther than > sx_unlock as sx_xunlock clearly indicates which type of locks held. Are the locking requirements (what needs to be locked and why/when, in which order) in the sound code documented somewhere? If yes: where? If no: can I convince you (either one or both of "you") to write something up (plain text would be enough for a start)? Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander _at_ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild _at_ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 Overheard: "How do I feel? Great! And I kiss pretty good, too!"Received on Thu Sep 15 2005 - 07:35:10 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:43 UTC