On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Ryan Stone <rysto32_at_gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Attilio Rao <attilio_at_freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> I seriously wonder why right now we don't assume the lock is unheld. >> There are likely historically reasons for that, but I would like to >> know which one are those and eventually fix them out. >> FWIK, all the other locking primitives assume the lock is already >> unheld when destroying and I think it would be good to have that for >> mutexes as well. >> >> Can you please show which lock triggers the panic you saw? >> >> Thanks, >> Attilio >> > > It was taskqueue_free: taskqueue_free() must not be called in places where there are still races, so the lock is not really meaningful and should be acquired. Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. EinsteinReceived on Sat Nov 24 2012 - 14:51:13 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:32 UTC