Re: lockmgr_sleep() (was Re: ssleep() (was Re: mention msleep() in porting_drivers.txt))

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

Aggelos Economopoulos wrote:
> So, about adding a lockmgr_sleep(): I think it would be useful; open-coding
> the whole thing makes it easy to slip in hard to notice bugs. But what should
> the prototype be? If we follow the freebsd semantics, the lock should be re-
> acquired on return. This means that we need to do a lockstatus() (which implies
> a spin_lock_wr()) to get information that the caller probably has available or

Why?  When we release the lock in lock_sleep, we will obtain the status 
anyways, right?

> *  lockmgr_sleep(void *ident, int flags, const char *wmesg, int timeo,
> 		struct lock *lk, int lkflags)

Looks nice this way, in case we need to pass the lkflags.

> spin_sleep(void *ident, int flags, const char *wmesg, int timo,
> 	struct spinlock *spin)

+1

> The down side of course is having to change a couple of dozen call sites. But
> as long as we're breaking people's patches with the name change, we might as
> well fix the interface, assuming everyone agrees that's an improvement.

No problem.  We could keep msleep() around for some time.

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   / \