On 05/11, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Fri, 11 May 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > Therefore, by taking the task_lock() here we make sure that the condition
> > is alyways false when we check it for kernel threads.
>
> Why *test* it then and return anything?
>
> Why not just doa "task_lock(p); task_unlock(p);" with no return value?
because we should not freeze a kernel thread at FREEZER_USER_SPACE stage?
without task_lock() we can see "p->mm != NULL" but not PF_BORROWED_MM.
Oleg.
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
