At 17:05 on Wed 12/03/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] masquerading as 'Sam Vilain' wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 12:00, Jacques Gelinas wrote:
> > > If you've got a setup/operating environment whichtriggers the oops,
> > > you might like to test my hypothesis by applying the attached patch
> > > after applying ctx16.
> >
> > ip_info is a pointer. While the content may change between the two
> > lines, the pointer itself can't, so your patch does nothing.
> 
> Is there any reason that the sys_release_ip_info/sys_assign_ip_info pair 
> don't take task_struct pointers like sys_release_s_info/sys_assign_s_info?  
> This would allow you to put the semaphore in a more meaningful place.

struct sock's ip_info member

> Putting on my System Engineer's hat, I'd also humbly suggest that the 
> sys_alloc_*_info functions explicitly take a pointer rather than relying 
> on `current'.  If nothing else, for consistency & because it doesn't lose 
> you any execution speed.  Globals suck, even if you think it's never going 
> to matter.
> -- 
> Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>   "I like a man who grins when he fights."
>  - Winston Churchill -

-- 
                   
 Jonathan Sambrook 
Software  Developer 
 Designer  Servers

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to