On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:08:13AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > On the other side, would that make sense to have a NET_LOCK()-free > sysctl path? >
To me it's better to remove uvm_vslock() from network related sysctl paths. uvm_vslock() used to avoid context switch in the uiomove() call to not break kernel lock protected data. It is not required for netlock protected network stuff. So, I propose to resurrect my sysctl unlocking diff. To push it forward i386 should be stable while performing dpb(1) build...
