raiden00pl commented on code in PR #11125: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/11125#discussion_r1382525781
########## fs/inode/fs_files.c: ########## @@ -583,6 +605,7 @@ int fs_getfilep(int fd, FAR struct file **filep) ret = nxmutex_lock(&list->fl_lock); Review Comment: there have been objections from @pkarashchenko about this approach https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/6012#issuecomment-1597341056 and https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/10164#pullrequestreview-1574491947 But I'm not sure if these are correct. We have a potential thread suspend if `kmm_realloc` is called, but with `xxx_critical_section` I don't see the problem. The problem would be when using `spin_lock_xxx` which must never suspend, there is no such requirement for `xxx_critical_section`. Without `spin_lock_xxx` this problem will probably not be fixed for SMP, so it won't be the final solution. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@nuttx.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
