Re: a take at cache coherency

["Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[forgot to post]

On 25.01.2006, at 14:41, Csaba Henk wrote:
> > I'd still use a ncp_shadowroot to get O(1) locking.
> While you deref the the shadowroot pointer to go for the group lock,
> the group might get broken up, and the shadowroot info will be stale.

This can't happen as we still have kernel locking.  At the moment there 
won't be any two threads running in parallel accessing namecache 
records.  Only if one of them blocks, another thread might sneak in.  
So doing a ->ncp_shadowinfo->ncp_exlocks++ is guarranteed to work (at 
the moment, when we make the namecache free of the BGL, we'll have to 
change the lock to something more sophisticated, but we're not there 
yet.)

cheers
  simon

--
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part