lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [2.3.11=pre6]: No OOPS, but mount segfaults remounting "/"?


On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> Aha. They are mostly equivalent, except that I missed low-level stuff on
> x86 and you left release_segments() in the blocking part (why?).

I think "release_segments()" is a user-mode thing. And who knows, on some
architectures it could block.

But hey, that was not really much of a decision, it just happened.

> Non-obvious difference: destroy_context() is gone in your version. Methink
> we'ld better leave it around... Probably it's a question to DaveM - all
> non-trivial context stuff sits in sun4c.c and srmmu.c.

I didn't want to leave it there: we still continue to use the context,
it's just lazy now. So I suspect destroy_context should go into the
__mmdrop() part, but without any deeper knowledge of any architecture that
needs it I didn't want to make the decision.

Good that you pointed it out, though. There are likely to be other
architecture issues that may need tweaking.

> Another thing: checks in binfmt_{elf,aout,whatnot}.c (is it dumpable?)
> should go into the top-level code. Otherwise we'll spend the eternity
> trying to resync all copies. I'll do it if you have no objections.

Sure.

> And it
> starts to smell like we would be better off with a kernel/mm.c instead of
> all having the context-related stuff scattered over the tree. Comments?

What kind of stuff?

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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.027 / U:7.740 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site