On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 06:40:05PM -0600, Simon Jeons wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 19:01 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
> > > One question.
> > >
> > > I found that mainly callsite of expand_stack() is #PF, but it holds
On Thu, 2013-01-03 at 16:50 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 19:01 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> >> Hi Simon,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
> >> > One question.
> >> >
> >> > I found
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 19:01 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
>> > One question.
>> >
>> > I found that mainly callsite of expand_stack() is #PF, but it holds
>> > mmap_sem ea
On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 19:01 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
> > One question.
> >
> > I found that mainly callsite of expand_stack() is #PF, but it holds
> > mmap_sem each time before call expand_stack(), how can hold a *shared*
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
> One question.
>
> I found that mainly callsite of expand_stack() is #PF, but it holds
> mmap_sem each time before call expand_stack(), how can hold a *shared*
> mmap_sem happen?
the #PF handler calls down_read(&mm->mmap_sem) before
On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 06:48 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> expand_stack() runs with a shared mmap_sem lock. Because of this, there
> could be multiple concurrent stack expansions in the same mm, which may
> cause problems in the vma gap update code.
>
> I propose to solve this by taking the mm-
expand_stack() runs with a shared mmap_sem lock. Because of this, there
could be multiple concurrent stack expansions in the same mm, which may
cause problems in the vma gap update code.
I propose to solve this by taking the mm->page_table_lock around such vma
expansions, in order to avoid the con
On Mon, 3 Dec 2012 16:35:01 -0800
Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Andrew Morton
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2012 22:56:27 -0800
> > Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> >
> >> expand_stack() runs with a shared mmap_sem lock. Because of this, there
> >> could be multiple concur
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2012 22:56:27 -0800
> Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>
>> expand_stack() runs with a shared mmap_sem lock. Because of this, there
>> could be multiple concurrent stack expansions in the same mm, which may
>> cause problems in the vma
On Fri, 30 Nov 2012 22:56:27 -0800
Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> expand_stack() runs with a shared mmap_sem lock. Because of this, there
> could be multiple concurrent stack expansions in the same mm, which may
> cause problems in the vma gap update code.
>
> I propose to solve this by taking the m
expand_stack() runs with a shared mmap_sem lock. Because of this, there
could be multiple concurrent stack expansions in the same mm, which may
cause problems in the vma gap update code.
I propose to solve this by taking the mm->page_table_lock around such vma
expansions, in order to avoid the con
11 matches
Mail list logo