Re: active_mm & SMP & TLB flush: possible bug

["Benjamin C.R. LaHaise" <blah@kvack.org>]

On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Manfred Spraul wrote:

> if these 2 CPU switch their roles, then we use an outdates
> TLB cache.

You're right, thankfully it's fixed in 2.3.12-8 (meaning that my dual
finally stops SIGSEGVing random processes).

> BTW, where can I find more details about the active_mm implementation?
> specifically, I'd like to know why active_mm was added to
> "struct task_struct".
> >From my first impression, it's a CPU specific information
> (every CPU has exactly one active_mm, threads which are not running have
> no
> active_mm), so I'd have used a global array[NR_CPUS].

That soulds like a good idea -- care to offer a patch? =)

		-ben

--
Hi!  I'm Signature Virus 99!  Copy me into your .signature and join the fun!

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/