[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [patch] take 2 Re: PG_swap_entry bug in recent kernels

To: Kanoj Sarcar <kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] take 2 Re: PG_swap_entry bug in recent kernels
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2000 01:39:10 +0200 (CEST)
cc: Ben LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>, riel@nl.linux.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org
In-Reply-To: <200004082321.QAA01209@google.engr.sgi.com>
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org

On Sat, 8 Apr 2000, Kanoj Sarcar wrote:

>As I mentioned before, have you stress tested this to make sure grabbing

I have stress tested the whole thing (also a few minutes ago to check the
latest patch) but it never locked up so we have to think about it.

Could you explain why you think it's the inverse lock ordering?

Andrea

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch] take 2 Re: PG_swap_entry bug in recent kernels
  - From: kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com (Kanoj Sarcar)

References:
- Re: [patch] take 2 Re: PG_swap_entry bug in recent kernels
  - From: kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com (Kanoj Sarcar)

Prev by Date: Re: zap_page_range(): TLB flush race
Next by Date: Re: zap_page_range(): TLB flush race
Prev by thread: Re: [patch] take 2 Re: PG_swap_entry bug in recent kernels
Next by thread: Re: [patch] take 2 Re: PG_swap_entry bug in recent kernels
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread