Andy wrote:
>>Going back to f_perms, I can't see where it is even initialised! So
>>right now, I've changed the bcopy() operation to say:
>
> How about new_client() in the bcopy()? I'm suspicious about what
> the M_CONNECT message looks like.
Sorry Andy, we haven't had time to look. But Gabriel also is worried
that there are no real spinlocks around the hash functions in
lib/hash.c. Could this be munging the messages and/or their handling?
Gabriel has started to put in the userland spinlock code, so we will
report if it helps.
Any other userland synchronisation areas we should worry about?
Warren
Received on Tue, 24 Feb 2004 16:50:28 +1000
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 26 2006 - 09:03:12 PDT