[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 11:39:48 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>, Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Subject: Re: getting processor numbers
* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> wrote:
> But we don't need tasklist_lock at all, we can use
> rcu_read_lock/unlock. Q: don't we need task_rq_lock() to read
> ->cpus_allowed "atomically" ?
right now ->cpus_allowed is protected by tasklist_lock. We cannot do RCU
here because ->cpus_allowed modifications are not RCUified.
Ingo
-
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