Re: [patch 1/5] vmalloc: do not check for freed locks on user maps

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:

> On Thursday 06 March 2008 04:20, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > On Thursday 06 March 2008 03:03, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > User maps do not contain kernel internal objects. No need to check
> > > > them.
> > >
> > > Why not? Depends on your definition of kernel internal... and
> > > objects ;)
> > >
> > > Drivers could create and manage some objects in this vmalloc
> > > area. They are no longer internal if you map them to userspace,
> > > but I still don't think you want to vunmap it until those
> > > object lifetimes are finished.
> >
> > Well, in case of the locks I have a hard time to figure out how you
> > use a spinlock/mutex with a user space address. The same applies for
> > timers or other objects used by kernel subsystems. So when the driver
> > writer creates an kernel related object in the vmalloc space, he has
> > to use the kernel mapping which is unmapped separate, right ?
> 
> This is the kernel mapping. The user mapping is unmapped when
> the userspace munmaps.

Ok, my misinterpretation of that flag. Is the user space unmap in the
same code path ? If yes, how can it be distinguished from the kernel
space unmap ?

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/