Re: [RFC][PATCH] Convert do_no_page() to a hook to avoid DFS race

[Paul E. McKenney (paulmck@us.ibm.com)]

On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 06:00:27PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > There
> > is still an inlined do_no_page() wrapper due to the fact that
> > do_anonymous_page() requires that the mm->page_table_lock be
> > held on entry, while the ->nopage callouts require that this
> > lock be dropped.
> 
> I sugest you change the ->nopage definition so that page_table_lock is held
> on entry to ->nopage, and ->nopage must drop it at some point.  This gives
> the nopage implementations some more flexibility and may perhaps eliminate
> that special case?

Will do!

> > This patch is untested.
> 
> I don't think there's a lot of point in making changes until the code which
> requires those changes is accepted into the tree.  Otherwise it may be
> pointless churn, and there's nothing in-tree to exercise the new features.

A GPLed use of these DFS features is expected Real Soon Now...

						Thanx, Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/