Messages in this thread | | | From | "Andrew E. Mileski" <> | Subject | Re: Loop Encryption | Date | Sun, 1 Jun 1997 22:19:58 -0400 (EDT) |
| |
> > What's the difference between BH_Locked and BH_Protected? > > BH_Locked prevents anybody from accessing the buffer (if they call > wait_on_buffer, that is). BH_Protected just prevents reuse of the > buffer, and IMHO is a broken feature --- if you want to pin a buffer > against reuse, the correct way should really be to increment b_count > around the critical code. > > > Using BH_Protected seems to work for the loop driver - buffers for the > > requests it creates cannot be freed until the loop driver is finished > > with them [or so I'm led to believe by the ramdisk driver]. > > If that's all you want, then use b_count instead. It has the > advantage that two concurrent processes trying to pin the buffer in > memory won't conflict with each other.
Thanks for the suggestion, but using b_count doesn't work in this case. There must be something else that BH_Protected does <shrug>
-- Andrew E. Mileski mailto:aem@netcom.ca Linux Plug-and-Play Hardware Support http://www.redhat.com/linux-info/pnp/ XFree86 Matrox Team http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~ajv/xf86-matrox.html Ottawa-Carleton Linux User's Group (OCLUG) http://www.storm.ca/~linux/
| |