On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:10:21PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > get it from some other thread? Below is the patch I tried for this: > I don't think this is wrong per se, but you shouldn't take the tasklist > lock normally. You're better off just doing Could you exlain why we might want to bother with that in the first place? In any case, why would we want to put that stuff on the common codepath instead of specialized ->permission()? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Sripathi Kodi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- References:
- [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Sripathi Kodi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Sripathi Kodi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Sripathi Kodi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 2.6.13.1] Patch for invisible threads
- Index(es):