Re: missing madvise functionality

Andi Kleen wrote:
Why do you need a lock for that? I don't see any problem with
two threads doing that in parallel. The kernel would
serialize it internally and one would fail, but that shouldn't
be a problem.

There is no lock at all at userlevel. I'm talking about locks in the
kernel.

--
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Relevant Pages

  • Re: missing madvise functionality
    ... The kernel would ... serialize it internally and one would fail, ... There is no lock at all at userlevel. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • [patch 00/10] PI-futex: -V1
    ... We are pleased to announce "lightweight userspace priority inheritance" ... No registration, no extra kernel ... only a single owner may own a lock (i.e. no ... Priority Inheritance - why, oh why??? ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: CFR: New NFS Lock Manager
    ... It also includes minor fixes to support 64bit architectures and RELENG_7. ... Lock Manager which runs in kernel mode and uses the normal local locking infrastructure for its state. ... A single thread should be sufficient for the NLM since it should rarely block in normal operation. ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • [patch 3/6] lightweight robust futexes: docs
    ... +The robust futex ABI ... for kernel assist of cleanup of held locks on task exit. ... will attempt to process both lists on each task ... pointer to a single linked list of 'lock entries', one per lock, ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: [PATCH] [13/16] HWPOISON: The high level memory error handler in the VM v3
    ... And anon_vma lock nests inside i_mmap_lock. ... right now to consume. ... will make the kernel bug. ... for pagecache pages), this may not be able to trigger the race I was ...
    (Linux-Kernel)