[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110803193457.GA6734@albatros>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 23:34:57 +0400
From: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Manuel Lauss <manuel.lauss@...glemail.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] shm: optimize exit_shm()
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 21:21 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > we should check .in_use once again after
> > down_write().
>
> Why?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/3/277
"No, as I said in the comment above, other task may be holding the mutex and
deleting the last shm segment. So, current task will see in_use == 1
before down_write(), but == 0 after it."
"Should" == additional check might speed the things, so it worth checking.
--
Vasiliy Kulikov
http://www.openwall.com - bringing security into open computing environments
--
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