lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jan]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: MM deadlock [was: Re: arca-vm-8...]
On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Savochkin Andrey Vladimirovich wrote:

> Well, doesn't semaphore recursion mean that the write atomicity
> is no more guaranteed by inode's i_sem semaphore?

Looking first Linus's patch I guessed right what does it mean recursion
over a sempahore (not that there would be many other choices though ;). As
I just pointed out the write atomicity is not more garanteed from the
internal path of the same process (previously in such case we would
deadlock but sure we had no ways to corrupt things). It's still garanteed
that many processes working on a critical section protected by the same
semaphore will not mess up things.

Andrea Arcangeli


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [W:0.156 / U:1.644 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site