[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 14:47:42 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc: Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>,
"Shai Fultheim (Shai@...lex86.org)" <shai@...lex86.org>,
pravin b shelar <pravin.shelar@...softinc.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] NUMA futex hashing
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 14:29, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 August 2006 12:36, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > We may have special case for PRIVATE futexes (they dont need to be
> > > chained in a global table, but a process private table)
> >
> > What do you mean with PRIVATE futex?
> >
> > Even if the futex mapping is only visible by a single MM mmap_sem is still
> > needed to protect against other threads doing mmap.
>
> Hum... I would call that a user error.
>
> If a thread is munmap()ing the vma that contains active futexes, result is
> undefined.
We can't allow anything that could crash the kernel, corrupt a kernel,
data structure, allow writing to freed memory etc. No matter how
defined it is or not. Working with a vma that doesn't have
an existence guarantee would be just that.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists