On Sun, 1 Aug 2010, Paul Goyette wrote: > Good point, and it will be a lot less work, too! :) And it solves the > problem of not permitting a rmutex being used with condvars. > > One question: Since an adaptive kmutex_t already includes an owner field, > would we really need to have another copy of it in the rmutex_t structure?
Why is there a need to hold a mutex across module loading instead of, say, having a reference count tht's protected by a mutex? I thought holding a mutex across a potentially blocking operation such as a module load is considered bad practice. Eduardo
