Re: Comment about proc-dont-lock-task_structs-indefinitely.patch

[ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)]

"Prasanna Meda" <mlp@google.com> writes:

> On 4/11/06, Prasanna Meda <mlp@google.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> The task decrement problem is fixed, but I think we have two more
>> problems in the following patch segment.
>>
>
> I think you agreed with the first problem. And the second problem is,
> show_map_internal is still treating m->private as task_struct instead
> of  proc_maps_private.

Sorry my brain has been off thinking about a subtle
bug accidentally introduced in 2.6.17-rc1.

You are absolutely right.  Somehow I missed the
fact that show_map_internal was using m->private.
Because get_gate_vma doesn't actually use it's argument
no bad behavior will result but that could change.

As for the seek case you may be right.
I have a cold that is beating on me, and I need to take a nap.

I remember looking at that closely and not seeing a problem,
but I have made mistakes before, and I'm not certain I recall
the seek case.


Eric




-
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/