Re: [patch] potential death in disassociate_ctty()

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Also, somewhere on the path from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 the call to >do_notify_parent() was moved inside the tasklist lock. Why was this? Ehh.. Because that is also what protects our "parent" pointer. Linus

[patch] potential death in disassociate_ctty()

The call to disassociate_ctty() in exit_notify() is very dangerous. If disassociate_ctty() calls schedule() then either: - a parent process who is spinning in fork.c:release() will stop spinning and will proceed to deallocate the child process's kernel stack. This will probably have

[patch] potential death in disassociate_ctty()

The call to disassociate_ctty() in exit_notify() is very dangerous. If disassociate_ctty() calls schedule() then either: - a parent process who is spinning in fork.c:release() will stop spinning and will proceed to deallocate the child process's kernel stack. This will probably have

Re: [patch] potential death in disassociate_ctty()

In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, somewhere on the path from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 the call to do_notify_parent() was moved inside the tasklist lock. Why was this? Ehh.. Because that is also what protects our "parent" pointer. Linus - To