From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <ab397ad4f84f44cfed5f8242258a5e3b@plan9.escet.urjc.es>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] qunlock
From: "Fco. J. Ballesteros" <nemo@lsub.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:34:36 +0200
In-Reply-To: <b1b442067ff610597d59cd246744559b@davidashen.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: ab6c646c-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> 	/* canqlock(b); */
> 	qunlock(b);

This is very weird for me.
Can't you rework your scheme to avoid such things?
Perhaps this code is suggesting that your locking
conventions may need more work.