Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Jan 1999 09:54:07 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [patch] fixed both processes in D state and the /proc/ oopses [Re: [patch] Fixed the race that was oopsing Linux-2.2.0] |
| |
On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> > > Do you want to know why last night I added a spinlock around mmget/mmput > > without thinking twice? Simply because mm->count was an atomic_t while it > > doesn't need to be an atomic_t in first place. > > Agreed.
Incorrect, see my previous email. It may not be strictly necessary right now due to us probably holding the kernel lock everywhere, but it is conceptually necessary, and it is _not_ an argument for a spinlock.
The /proc code has to be fixed, but the easy fix is to just revert to the old one as far as I can see. I shouldn't have accepted the /proc patches in the first place, and I'm sorry I did.
Linus
- 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/
| |