Jason Evans wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 04:54:30AM +1000, Andrew Kenneth Milton wrote:
> > However, recently simple_lock and friends seem to have disappeared, and the
> > kernel modules make some use of them (although there is still reference
> > to it in machine/smptests.h)
> > It looked like I could replace them with calls to mtx_* stuff
> > Removing the calls to simple_lock etc sure made it run a lot faster though,
> > but, I think I'd rather have the safety.
> > What are the 'new' corresponding structures and calls for simple_lock ?
> Mutexes should be used in places where simplelocks were used. With few
> exceptions, sleep mutexes should be used (even though simplelocks were spin
> locks). See mutex(9) for details. Be forewarned that there is work in
> progress to clean up the mutex API that will probably be checked in within
> a week. Transitioning from the current mutex API to the upcoming one will
> be trivial, but it will have to be done if you convert to mutexes in the
> next few days.
where can we see the new spec (or at least a sample)?
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
__--_|\ Julian Elischer
/ \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
( OZ ) World tour 2000-2001
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message