On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 11:02:27AM -0700, ying@almaden.ibm.com wrote:
> Based on my browsing through the kernel code, it appears that the
> page->wait queue is not protected by any spinlocks. This means that
> multiple processes running on SMP can simultaneously call "wait_on_page".
> If the page is locked already, those processes would all be
> put into the wait queue. Without a spinlock to protect the page wait queue
> access, the queue can be messed up. Is this correct? Am I missing
> anything here?
Err, the spinlock that add_wait_queue() takes?
-- Ah, but you're forgetting Rimmer directive 273 which states just as clearly, "No chance you metal bastard!"- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 21:00:19 EST