lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] blackfin: ptrace mm/sram_list fixes
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 15:55, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 05/26, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> On 05/25, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > we probably should add proper locking to this
>> > structure though.
>>
>> Agreed. I'll try to make the trivial patch tomorrow. I think we
>> can just use mm->mmap_sem, is_user_addr_valid() needs this lock
>> for find_vma() anyway.
>
> please see the patches.

awesome ! wasnt expecting someone to do the work for us :).

> UNTESTED! the second one certainly needs the review from someone
> who knows what this code does ;)

np. after i look them over, i'll suck them into the Blackfin tree and
let them settle for a release for our test suites to shake out
problems.

> BTW. Obviously sys_sram_alloc() can create multiple sram_list_struct
> nodes with the same ->addr (with or without this patch), I hope this
> is fine.

how so ? Blackfin is a nommu arch, so there should be no aliasing
issues. each of the individual L1 sub-allocators manage a different
address range, and none of those should return an address that is
already in use. it could happen that the code calling these funcs
calls a free func directly instead of going through the lsl free, but
that's a bug in the usage, not this code.
-mike


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-27 22:23    [W:0.175 / U:0.220 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site