lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] scheduler fixes, 2.5.32-BK
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > - changes the migration code to use struct completion. Andrew pointed out
> > that there might be a small window in where the up() touches the
> > semaphore while the waiting task goes on and frees its stack. And
> > completion is more suited for this kind of stuff anyway.
>
> actually, i think the race does not exist. up() is perfectly safely done
> on the on-stack semaphore, because both the wake_up() done by __up() and
> the __down() path takes the waitqueue spinlock, so i cannot see where the
> up() touches the semaphore after the down()-ed task has been woken up.
>

yep, looks like the killing of the semaphore_lock made the race
go away.

But ia64, sparc and x86_64 use semaphore_lock, so they still are
exposed.
-
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 13:28    [W:0.036 / U:6.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site