![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Christian Ehrhardt wrote: > sys_sched_setaffinity, lines: > 1571 get_task_struct(p); > 1572 read_unlock(&tasklist_lock); > Line 1571 calls get_task_struct because the task might exit during the > syscall. Suppose that this is exactly what happens. This means that line > 1583 will effectivly free the task. But set_cpus_allowed stuffed a > pointer to the task into a request struct without incrementing the usage > count of the task struct. note that the scenario you describe is not possible, because set_cpus_allowed() will wait for the migration thread to do its work - so the put_task_struct can never come before the last use of the task structure. See the 'down(&req.sem)' in set_cpus_allowed(), and the up(&req->sem) in migration_thread(). Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:22 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||