[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140618125307.3994b701@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:53:07 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: safety of *mutex_unlock() (Was: [BUG] signal: sighand
unprotected when accessed by /proc)
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 18:43:59 +0200
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> And (contrary to what I said initially) we can rely on this because -rt
> converts spinlock_t into rt_mutex ?
Correct. Because if spinlock_t has this behavior, rt_mutex must have it
too, otherwise -rt will suffer greatly from that. Who knows, maybe this
will fix some strange bug reports that we have had in the past.
-- Steve
--
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