Re: [PATCH] Remove page_table_lock from vma manipulations

From: Dave McCracken (dmccr@us.ibm.com)
Date: Wed Jun 04 2003 - 17:58:22 EST


--On Wednesday, June 04, 2003 15:38:09 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
wrote:

>> After more careful consideration, I don't see any reasons why
>> page_table_lock is necessary for dealing with vmas. I found one spot in
>> swapoff, but it was easily changed to mmap_sem.
>
> What keeps the VMA tree consistent when try_to_unmap_one()
> runs find_vma()?

Gah. I don't know how I convinced myself that code was safe. It's easily
fixed. How does this one look?

Dave

======================================================================
Dave McCracken IBM Linux Base Kernel Team 1-512-838-3059
dmccr@us.ibm.com T/L 678-3059



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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 07 2003 - 22:00:25 EST