[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100108092333.1040c799.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:23:33 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"minchan.kim@...il.com" <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
"hugh.dickins" <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/8] mm: handle_speculative_fault()
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 14:33:50 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > I haven't yet looked at the patch, but isn't expand_stack() kinda like
> > what you want? That serializes using anon_vma_lock().
>
> Yeah, that sounds like the right thing to do. It is the same operation,
> after all (and has the same effects, especially for the special case of
> upwards-growing stacks).
>
> So basically the idea is to extend that stack expansion to brk(), and
> possibly mmap() in general.
>
Hmm, do_brk() sometimes unmap conflicting mapping. Isn't it be a problem ?
Stack expansion just fails and SEGV if it hit with other mmaps....
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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