lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [no patch] broken use of mm_release / deactivate_mm


On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> > I agree. Looks like the "exit_mm()" should really be a "mmput()".
> >
> > Can we have a few more eyes on this thing? Ingo, Nick?
>
> AFAIKS yes. exit_mm doesn't look legal unless its dropping the current
> mm context. And mmput looks like it should clean up everything - it is
> used almost exactly the same way to cleanup a failure case in copy_mm.

Does everybody also agree that the

if (p->active_mm)
mmdrop(p->active_mm);

should also be dropped, and that mmput() does all of that correctly too?

(Again, looking at all the counts etc, I think the answer is a resounding
yes, but dammit, this code has obviously never gotten any testing at all,
since it effectively never happens).

Linus
-
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: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:1.679 / U:1.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site