> Yes it does. I am almost sure the bug should be trivial, but > somehow can't find find it. Just fyi, to ensure this is connected > to utrace-indirect I applied the hack below and the bug goes away.
Does s/kmem_cache_zalloc/kzalloc/ really have anything to do with it? Isn't it just the allocation synchronization logic? > OK. Tomorrow I will just read utrace.c trying to understand the > details of the new code, perhaps I will notice something. Ok. I hope you'll find something not too strange. But if it takes long, then probably we should just change utrace_init_task() to eagerly call utrace_task_alloc() and let you work through other issues first. Thanks, Roland