From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268240AbUHXTig (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:38:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268245AbUHXTig (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:38:36 -0400 Received: from S010600105aa6e9d5.gv.shawcable.net ([24.68.24.66]:46976 "EHLO spitfire.gotdns.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268240AbUHXTib (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:38:31 -0400 From: Ryan Cumming To: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [patch] ioport-cache-2.6.8.1.patch Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:38:26 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 References: <20040824071928.GA7697@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20040824071928.GA7697@elte.hu> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2336687.ZfKeHfAi8o"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200408241238.29702.ryan@spitfire.gotdns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart2336687.ZfKeHfAi8o Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 24 August 2004 00:19, you wrote: > +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0if (likely(next =3D=3D tss->io_bitmap_owner)) { Probably a stupid question, but what's stopping the tss->io_bitmap_owner fr= om=20 being killed, and then a new thread_struct being kmalloc()'ed in the exact= =20 same place as the old one? I realize it's highly unlikely, I'm just wonderi= ng=20 if it's possible at all. I guess clearing tss->io_bitmap_owner whenever we kfree() the bitmap owner'= s=20 thread_struct would plug that up. =2DRyan --nextPart2336687.ZfKeHfAi8o Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBBK5k1W4yVCW5p+qYRAhO4AJ0ZFrtmZhgwPZVj3UavXtZZUI/7CgCeMSZX yrX9gzVUcjSspXvfY5/+YFQ= =GE3/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2336687.ZfKeHfAi8o--