On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 10:59:48AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> You can drop this patch.
>
> This turned out to be a race in xpmem. It "appeared" as if it were a
> race in get_task_mm, but it really is not. The current->mm field is
> cleared under the task_lock and the task_lock is grabbed by get_
You can drop this patch.
This turned out to be a race in xpmem. It "appeared" as if it were a
race in get_task_mm, but it really is not. The current->mm field is
cleared under the task_lock and the task_lock is grabbed by get_task_mm.
I have been testing you v15 version without this patch and n
# HG changeset patch
# User Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
# Date 1210115127 -7200
# Node ID c5badbefeee07518d9d1acca13e94c981420317c
# Parent e20917dcc8284b6a07cfcced13dda4cbca850a9c
get_task_mm
get_task_mm should not succeed if mmput() is running and has reduced
the mm_users count to zero
# HG changeset patch
# User Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
# Date 1209740185 -7200
# Node ID c85c85c4be165eb6de16136bb97cf1fa7fd5c88f
# Parent 1489529e7b53d3f2dab8431372aa4850ec821caa
get_task_mm
get_task_mm should not succeed if mmput() is running and has reduced
the mm_users count to zero
