[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100428180336.GC510@random.random>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:03:36 +0200
From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] take all anon_vma locks in anon_vma_lock
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 01:47:19PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> static inline void anon_vma_unlock(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
never mind as this is RFC, lock is clear enough
> @@ -1762,7 +1760,8 @@ static int expand_downwards(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> if (error)
> return error;
>
> - anon_vma_lock(vma);
> + spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> + anon_vma_lock(vma, &mm->page_table_lock);
This will cause a lock inversion (page_table_lock can only be taken
after the anon_vma lock). I don't immediately see why the
page_table_lock here though?
--
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