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]