lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Multi-Threaded fork() correctness on Linux 2.4 & 2.6
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> We hold the page_table_lock when doing the fork(), so T2 can't actually be
> copying the page until we've done the TLB flush, no? And once the TLB
> flush is done, all the writes by T3 should be in the page, so we copy the
> right thing at that point, and there is no consistency problems?

I was totally overlooking the page_table_lock during the fork.

But no matter, it's not good enough: src_mm->page_table_lock is acquired
and dropped at the inner level, in copy_pte_range (looking at latest 2.6):
it cannot be held across allocating page tables for dst_mm.

So each time T1 drops it, there's a window for the T2 vs. T3 problem.
Yet we don't much want to flush TLB each time we leave copy_pte_range.

Hugh
-
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: 2005-09-19 22:18    [W:0.053 / U:21.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site