Re: [RFC] NUMA futex hashing
From: Andi Kleen
Date: Tue Aug 08 2006 - 08:47:53 EST
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 14:29, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 August 2006 12:36, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > We may have special case for PRIVATE futexes (they dont need to be
> > > chained in a global table, but a process private table)
> > What do you mean with PRIVATE futex?
> > Even if the futex mapping is only visible by a single MM mmap_sem is still
> > needed to protect against other threads doing mmap.
> Hum... I would call that a user error.
> If a thread is munmap()ing the vma that contains active futexes, result is
We can't allow anything that could crash the kernel, corrupt a kernel,
data structure, allow writing to freed memory etc. No matter how
defined it is or not. Working with a vma that doesn't have
an existence guarantee would be just that.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/