Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 4 Feb 2006 19:18:03 -0800 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/5] cpuset memory spread slab cache optimizations |
| |
Andrew wrote: > perhaps a weaselly comment would cover that worry.
Well ... the comment was there, but the problem with comments is no one reads them ;)
+ * The task struct 'p' should either be current or a newly + * forked child that is not visible on the task list yet. + */ + +void mpol_set_task_struct_flag(struct task_struct *p)
> this function's interface really does invite that > race and hence is not very good
Agreed. I'm still scratching my head coming up with a better way.
Hmmm ... except for the call from fork, all calls to this are from within mm/mempolicy.c. I could make the routine within mempolicy.c static, and provide an exported wrapper with a name like:
mpol_fix_fork_child_flag()
that wrapped it. With a name like that, there seems less risk of abusing this.
Any other suggestions?
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - 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/
| |