All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] cpu: Document clear_tasks_mm_cpumask()
Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 01:47:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120505014728.GA9079@lizard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335869133.13683.125.camel@twins>

This patch adds more comments on clear_tasks_mm_cpumask, plus adds
a runtime check: the function is only suitable for offlined CPUs,
and if called inappropriately, the kernel should scream aloud.

Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
---

On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 12:45:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 16:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > +void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
> > 
> > The operation of this function was presumably obvious to you at the
> > time you wrote it, but that isn't true of other people at later times.
> > 
> > Please document it?
[...]
> > If someone tries to use this function for a different purpose, or
> > copies-and-modifies it for a different purpose, we just shot them in
> > the foot.
> > 
> > They'd be pretty dumb to do that without reading the local comment,
> > but still...
> 
> Methinks something simple like:
> 
> 	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
> 
> Ought to cure that worry, no? :-)

Yeah, this is all good ideas, thanks.

How about the following patch?

 kernel/cpu.c |   18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c
index ecdf499..1bfa26f 100644
--- a/kernel/cpu.c
+++ b/kernel/cpu.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
 #include <linux/oom.h>
 #include <linux/rcupdate.h>
 #include <linux/export.h>
+#include <linux/bug.h>
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/stop_machine.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
@@ -173,6 +174,18 @@ void __ref unregister_cpu_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_cpu_notifier);
 
+/**
+ * clear_tasks_mm_cpumask - Safely clear tasks' mm_cpumask for a CPU
+ * @cpu: a CPU id
+ *
+ * This function walks up all processes, finds a valid mm struct for
+ * each one and then clears a corresponding bit in mm's cpumask. While
+ * this all sounds trivial, there are various non-obvious corner cases,
+ * which this function tries to solve in a safe manner.
+ *
+ * Also note that the function uses a somewhat relaxed locking scheme,
+ * so it may be called only for an already offlined CPU.
+ */
 void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 {
 	struct task_struct *p;
@@ -184,10 +197,15 @@ void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 	 * Thus, we may use rcu_read_lock() here, instead of grabbing
 	 * full-fledged tasklist_lock.
 	 */
+	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_process(p) {
 		struct task_struct *t;
 
+		/*
+		 * Main thread might exit, but other threads may still have
+		 * a valid mm. Find one.
+		 */
 		t = find_lock_task_mm(p);
 		if (!t)
 			continue;
-- 
1.7.9.2


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
	user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: [PATCH] cpu: Document clear_tasks_mm_cpumask()
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 18:47:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120505014728.GA9079@lizard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335869133.13683.125.camel@twins>

This patch adds more comments on clear_tasks_mm_cpumask, plus adds
a runtime check: the function is only suitable for offlined CPUs,
and if called inappropriately, the kernel should scream aloud.

Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
---

On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 12:45:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 16:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > +void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
> > 
> > The operation of this function was presumably obvious to you at the
> > time you wrote it, but that isn't true of other people at later times.
> > 
> > Please document it?
[...]
> > If someone tries to use this function for a different purpose, or
> > copies-and-modifies it for a different purpose, we just shot them in
> > the foot.
> > 
> > They'd be pretty dumb to do that without reading the local comment,
> > but still...
> 
> Methinks something simple like:
> 
> 	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
> 
> Ought to cure that worry, no? :-)

Yeah, this is all good ideas, thanks.

How about the following patch?

 kernel/cpu.c |   18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c
index ecdf499..1bfa26f 100644
--- a/kernel/cpu.c
+++ b/kernel/cpu.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
 #include <linux/oom.h>
 #include <linux/rcupdate.h>
 #include <linux/export.h>
+#include <linux/bug.h>
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/stop_machine.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
@@ -173,6 +174,18 @@ void __ref unregister_cpu_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_cpu_notifier);
 
+/**
+ * clear_tasks_mm_cpumask - Safely clear tasks' mm_cpumask for a CPU
+ * @cpu: a CPU id
+ *
+ * This function walks up all processes, finds a valid mm struct for
+ * each one and then clears a corresponding bit in mm's cpumask. While
+ * this all sounds trivial, there are various non-obvious corner cases,
+ * which this function tries to solve in a safe manner.
+ *
+ * Also note that the function uses a somewhat relaxed locking scheme,
+ * so it may be called only for an already offlined CPU.
+ */
 void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 {
 	struct task_struct *p;
@@ -184,10 +197,15 @@ void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 	 * Thus, we may use rcu_read_lock() here, instead of grabbing
 	 * full-fledged tasklist_lock.
 	 */
+	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_process(p) {
 		struct task_struct *t;
 
+		/*
+		 * Main thread might exit, but other threads may still have
+		 * a valid mm. Find one.
+		 */
 		t = find_lock_task_mm(p);
 		if (!t)
 			continue;
-- 
1.7.9.2


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
	user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
	patches@linaro.org,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] cpu: Document clear_tasks_mm_cpumask()
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 18:47:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120505014728.GA9079@lizard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335869133.13683.125.camel@twins>

This patch adds more comments on clear_tasks_mm_cpumask, plus adds
a runtime check: the function is only suitable for offlined CPUs,
and if called inappropriately, the kernel should scream aloud.

Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
---

On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 12:45:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 16:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > +void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
> > 
> > The operation of this function was presumably obvious to you at the
> > time you wrote it, but that isn't true of other people at later times.
> > 
> > Please document it?
[...]
> > If someone tries to use this function for a different purpose, or
> > copies-and-modifies it for a different purpose, we just shot them in
> > the foot.
> > 
> > They'd be pretty dumb to do that without reading the local comment,
> > but still...
> 
> Methinks something simple like:
> 
> 	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
> 
> Ought to cure that worry, no? :-)

Yeah, this is all good ideas, thanks.

How about the following patch?

 kernel/cpu.c |   18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c
index ecdf499..1bfa26f 100644
--- a/kernel/cpu.c
+++ b/kernel/cpu.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
 #include <linux/oom.h>
 #include <linux/rcupdate.h>
 #include <linux/export.h>
+#include <linux/bug.h>
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/stop_machine.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
@@ -173,6 +174,18 @@ void __ref unregister_cpu_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_cpu_notifier);
 
+/**
+ * clear_tasks_mm_cpumask - Safely clear tasks' mm_cpumask for a CPU
+ * @cpu: a CPU id
+ *
+ * This function walks up all processes, finds a valid mm struct for
+ * each one and then clears a corresponding bit in mm's cpumask. While
+ * this all sounds trivial, there are various non-obvious corner cases,
+ * which this function tries to solve in a safe manner.
+ *
+ * Also note that the function uses a somewhat relaxed locking scheme,
+ * so it may be called only for an already offlined CPU.
+ */
 void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 {
 	struct task_struct *p;
@@ -184,10 +197,15 @@ void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 	 * Thus, we may use rcu_read_lock() here, instead of grabbing
 	 * full-fledged tasklist_lock.
 	 */
+	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_process(p) {
 		struct task_struct *t;
 
+		/*
+		 * Main thread might exit, but other threads may still have
+		 * a valid mm. Find one.
+		 */
 		t = find_lock_task_mm(p);
 		if (!t)
 			continue;
-- 
1.7.9.2

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: anton.vorontsov@linaro.org (Anton Vorontsov)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] cpu: Document clear_tasks_mm_cpumask()
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 18:47:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120505014728.GA9079@lizard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335869133.13683.125.camel@twins>

This patch adds more comments on clear_tasks_mm_cpumask, plus adds
a runtime check: the function is only suitable for offlined CPUs,
and if called inappropriately, the kernel should scream aloud.

Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
---

On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 12:45:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 16:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > +void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
> > 
> > The operation of this function was presumably obvious to you at the
> > time you wrote it, but that isn't true of other people at later times.
> > 
> > Please document it?
[...]
> > If someone tries to use this function for a different purpose, or
> > copies-and-modifies it for a different purpose, we just shot them in
> > the foot.
> > 
> > They'd be pretty dumb to do that without reading the local comment,
> > but still...
> 
> Methinks something simple like:
> 
> 	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
> 
> Ought to cure that worry, no? :-)

Yeah, this is all good ideas, thanks.

How about the following patch?

 kernel/cpu.c |   18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c
index ecdf499..1bfa26f 100644
--- a/kernel/cpu.c
+++ b/kernel/cpu.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
 #include <linux/oom.h>
 #include <linux/rcupdate.h>
 #include <linux/export.h>
+#include <linux/bug.h>
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/stop_machine.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
@@ -173,6 +174,18 @@ void __ref unregister_cpu_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_cpu_notifier);
 
+/**
+ * clear_tasks_mm_cpumask - Safely clear tasks' mm_cpumask for a CPU
+ * @cpu: a CPU id
+ *
+ * This function walks up all processes, finds a valid mm struct for
+ * each one and then clears a corresponding bit in mm's cpumask. While
+ * this all sounds trivial, there are various non-obvious corner cases,
+ * which this function tries to solve in a safe manner.
+ *
+ * Also note that the function uses a somewhat relaxed locking scheme,
+ * so it may be called only for an already offlined CPU.
+ */
 void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 {
 	struct task_struct *p;
@@ -184,10 +197,15 @@ void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 	 * Thus, we may use rcu_read_lock() here, instead of grabbing
 	 * full-fledged tasklist_lock.
 	 */
+	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_process(p) {
 		struct task_struct *t;
 
+		/*
+		 * Main thread might exit, but other threads may still have
+		 * a valid mm. Find one.
+		 */
 		t = find_lock_task_mm(p);
 		if (!t)
 			continue;
-- 
1.7.9.2

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
	user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: [PATCH] cpu: Document clear_tasks_mm_cpumask()
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 18:47:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120505014728.GA9079@lizard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335869133.13683.125.camel@twins>

This patch adds more comments on clear_tasks_mm_cpumask, plus adds
a runtime check: the function is only suitable for offlined CPUs,
and if called inappropriately, the kernel should scream aloud.

Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@linaro.org>
---

On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 12:45:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 16:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > +void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
> > 
> > The operation of this function was presumably obvious to you at the
> > time you wrote it, but that isn't true of other people at later times.
> > 
> > Please document it?
[...]
> > If someone tries to use this function for a different purpose, or
> > copies-and-modifies it for a different purpose, we just shot them in
> > the foot.
> > 
> > They'd be pretty dumb to do that without reading the local comment,
> > but still...
> 
> Methinks something simple like:
> 
> 	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
> 
> Ought to cure that worry, no? :-)

Yeah, this is all good ideas, thanks.

How about the following patch?

 kernel/cpu.c |   18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/cpu.c b/kernel/cpu.c
index ecdf499..1bfa26f 100644
--- a/kernel/cpu.c
+++ b/kernel/cpu.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
 #include <linux/oom.h>
 #include <linux/rcupdate.h>
 #include <linux/export.h>
+#include <linux/bug.h>
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/stop_machine.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
@@ -173,6 +174,18 @@ void __ref unregister_cpu_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_cpu_notifier);
 
+/**
+ * clear_tasks_mm_cpumask - Safely clear tasks' mm_cpumask for a CPU
+ * @cpu: a CPU id
+ *
+ * This function walks up all processes, finds a valid mm struct for
+ * each one and then clears a corresponding bit in mm's cpumask. While
+ * this all sounds trivial, there are various non-obvious corner cases,
+ * which this function tries to solve in a safe manner.
+ *
+ * Also note that the function uses a somewhat relaxed locking scheme,
+ * so it may be called only for an already offlined CPU.
+ */
 void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 {
 	struct task_struct *p;
@@ -184,10 +197,15 @@ void clear_tasks_mm_cpumask(int cpu)
 	 * Thus, we may use rcu_read_lock() here, instead of grabbing
 	 * full-fledged tasklist_lock.
 	 */
+	WARN_ON(cpu_online(cpu));
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	for_each_process(p) {
 		struct task_struct *t;
 
+		/*
+		 * Main thread might exit, but other threads may still have
+		 * a valid mm. Find one.
+		 */
 		t = find_lock_task_mm(p);
 		if (!t)
 			continue;
-- 
1.7.9.2

--
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-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2012-05-05  1:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-23  7:06 [PATCH v3 0/9] Fixes for common mistakes w/ for_each_process and task->mm Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:06 ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:06 ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:06 ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:06 ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:07 ` [PATCH 1/9] cpu: Introduce clear_tasks_mm_cpumask() helper Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:07   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:07   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:07   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:07   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-26 23:59   ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-26 23:59     ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-26 23:59     ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-26 23:59     ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-26 23:59     ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-26 23:59     ` Andrew Morton
2012-05-01 10:45     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-01 10:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-01 10:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-01 10:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-01 10:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-05  1:47       ` Anton Vorontsov [this message]
2012-05-05  1:47         ` [PATCH] cpu: Document clear_tasks_mm_cpumask() Anton Vorontsov
2012-05-05  1:47         ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-05-05  1:47         ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-05-05  1:47         ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-05-05  1:47     ` [PATCH 1/9] cpu: Introduce clear_tasks_mm_cpumask() helper Anton Vorontsov
2012-05-05  1:47       ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-05-05  1:47       ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-05-05  1:47       ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-05-05  1:47       ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08 ` [PATCH 2/9] arm: Use clear_tasks_mm_cpumask() Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08 ` [PATCH 3/9] powerpc: " Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08 ` [PATCH 4/9] sh: " Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:08   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09 ` [PATCH 5/9] blackfin: A couple of task->mm handling fixes Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-06-01  4:36   ` Mike Frysinger
2012-06-01  4:36     ` Mike Frysinger
2012-06-01  4:36     ` Mike Frysinger
2012-06-01  4:36     ` Mike Frysinger
2012-04-23  7:09 ` [PATCH 6/9] blackfin: Fix possible deadlock in decode_address() Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09 ` [PATCH 7/9] um: Should hold tasklist_lock while traversing processes Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23 14:57   ` Richard Weinberger
2012-04-23 14:57     ` Richard Weinberger
2012-04-23 14:57     ` Richard Weinberger
2012-04-23 14:57     ` Richard Weinberger
2012-04-23 14:57     ` Richard Weinberger
2012-04-23 15:40     ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23 15:40       ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23 15:40       ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23 15:40       ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23 15:40       ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09 ` [PATCH 8/9] um: Fix possible race on task->mm Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09 ` [PATCH 9/9] um: Properly check all process' threads for a live mm Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov
2012-04-23  7:09   ` Anton Vorontsov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120505014728.GA9079@lizard \
    --to=anton.vorontsov@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.