On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Blaisorblade wrote: > > No, it should be fine as is (unless perhaps some barrier is needed). We already have the barrier needed: we're holding page_table_lock (pte lock). Hugh - 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/
- References:
- Re: [PATCH] 2.6.14 patch for supporting madvise(MADV_FREE)
- From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] 2.6.14 patch for supporting madvise(MADV_REMOVE)
- From: Badari Pulavarty <[email protected]>
- New bug in patch and existing Linux code - race with install_page() (was: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.14 patch for supporting madvise(MADV_REMOVE))
- From: Blaisorblade <[email protected]>
- Re: New bug in patch and existing Linux code - race with install_page() (was: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.14 patch for supporting madvise(MADV_REMOVE))
- From: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] 2.6.14 patch for supporting madvise(MADV_FREE)
- Prev by Date: Re: bad page state under possibly oom situation
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH]dgrs - Fixes Warnings when CONFIG_ISA and CONFIG_PCI are not enabled
- Previous by thread: Re: New bug in patch and existing Linux code - race with install_page() (was: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.14 patch for supporting madvise(MADV_REMOVE))
- Next by thread: Re: New bug in patch and existing Linux code - race with install_page() (was: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.14 patch for supporting madvise(MADV_REMOVE))
- Index(es):
 |