[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702242204220.4370@blonde.wat.veritas.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 22:10:57 +0000 (GMT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>, dipankar@...ibm.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PREEMPT_RCU breaks anon_vma locking ?
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> This look like a valid fix to me, at least as long as the lock is never
> dropped in the meantime (e.g., to do I/O). If the lock -is- dropped in
> the meantime, then presumably whatever is done to keep the page from
> vanishing should allow an rcu_read_unlock() to be placed after each
> spin_unlock(&...->lock) and an rcu_read_lock() to be placed before each
> spin_lock(&...->lock).
Thankfully no complications of that kind, page_lock_anon_vma is static
to mm/rmap.c, and only used to hold the spin lock while examining page
tables of the vmas in the list, never a need to drop that lock at all.
(Until the day when someone reports such a long list that we start to
worry about the latency.)
Hugh
-
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