Re: Oddness in i_shared_lock and page_table_lock nesting hierarchies ?

From: David S. Miller (davem@redhat.com)
Date: Fri Nov 10 2000 - 02:34:26 EST


   From: aprasad@in.ibm.com
   Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 12:25:24 +0530

   this link might be useful
   http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-mm/2000-07/msg00038.html

This talks about a completely different bug.

We are talking here about inconsistant ordering of lock acquisition
when both mapping->i_shared_lock and mm->page_table_lock must be
held simultaneously.

The thread you quoted merely mentions the issue we have mm->rss
modifications are not always protected properly by the
page_table_lock.

There were no previous public discussions about the
i_shared_lock/page_table_lock deadlock problems.

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 15 2000 - 21:00:16 EST