Re: [PATCH 2/2] Futex non-page-pinning fix

[William Lee Irwin III]

William Lee Irwin III <wli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>  Then it sounds relatively easy to localize the search structure (if you
>>  care to do so),

On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 10:29:31AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> The "group of all processes which could potentially (or really do) share a
> chunk of anon memory" thing sounds tricky.

Not really; it's just a random data structure with very low odds of
proliferating. Hugh did it once (for anobjrmap) and I rearranged and/or
rewrote it to suit my preferences (I think I RCU'd the lock in it or
some ridiculous nonsense on that order).


William Lee Irwin III <wli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> apart from a policy decision about what on earth to do
>>  about waiters on truncated futexes.

On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 10:29:31AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> erk, screwed.

Well, the decision is essentially arbitrary, it just has to be made
(and by definition some decision is being made regardless of what the
implementation does or fails to do). 


-- wli
-
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/