Re: [RFT][PATCH] 2.3.10 pre5 SMP/vm fixes

Kanoj Sarcar (kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com)
Thu, 8 Jul 1999 11:03:27 -0700 (PDT)

>
>
>
> On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Kanoj Sarcar wrote:
> >
> > *****************************************************************
> > 3. In mm/memory.c, a new comment claims:
> > "The adding of pages is protected by the MM semaphore"
> > which is not quite correct, since swapoff does not hold this semaphore.
>
> The fix is to fix swapoff, not to change the comment.
>

Couldn't agree more ... that is why I sent a patch for this (ie to
fix swapoff) on linux-mm, and reiterated the pointer to the patch
in this thread. Here it is again:

http://humbolt.nl.linux.org/lists/linux-mm/1999-06/msg00075.html

Let me know if you want me to create it against pre5. Or if you
see a problem with it ... we talked about it quite a bit on
linux-mm.

> page_table_lock is _not_ going to be added to this path - I refuse to add> locks to common cases just to protect against things that never run in
> practice.
>

I assume you are talking about the fault path here ... none of the
patches I posted adds page_table_lock to that path, right? Of
course without the lock, there might be other problems, I am
not sure yet, will let you know if I see something ...

Kanoj

> Linus
>

-
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/