On Wed, Apr 26, 2000 at 07:13:27PM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> a new per-inode lock would enlarge the inode structure by another 4
> bytes, I'd like to avoid that.
> We cannot use i_sem, kill_fasync is called from irq (bh?) context.
kill_fasync takes no locks. send_sigio() takes the tasklist_lock but
that doesn't serialise accesses to the fasync list.
my current state of play is up at:
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:00:11 EST