Re: nfs mmap adventure (was: 2.6.23-mm1)

Nick Piggin <[email protected]> wrote:

> I don't think the fault handler is currently in any position to do
> that ATM. It is possible to make it interruptible in some contexts,
> but faults from kernel code may not be able to cope.

Hmmm...  Good point.  Yuck.

David
-
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: nfs mmap adventure (was: 2.6.23-mm1)
  - From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- nfs mmap adventure (was: 2.6.23-mm1)
  - From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- 2.6.23-mm1
  - From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: nfs mmap adventure (was: 2.6.23-mm1)
  - From: David Howells <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Misc: phantom, synchronize_irq() on suspend
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Misc: phantom, improved data passing
Previous by thread: Re: nfs mmap adventure (was: 2.6.23-mm1)
Next by thread: Re: 2.6.23-mm1 - regression- PowerPC link failure at arch/powerpc/kernel/head_64.o
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]