* why hold bkl during do_coredump?
@ 2004-08-03 18:52 Josh Aas
2004-08-05 4:18 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Josh Aas @ 2004-08-03 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
I'm looking at not holding the bkl during do_coredump, but I can't
figure out why its being held in the first place. I can only think of
the need to not mess with the current memory map, but mmap_sem is
currently held as well. Anybody know what is going on here?
--
Josh Aas
Silicon Graphics, Inc. (SGI)
Linux System Software
651-683-3068
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: why hold bkl during do_coredump?
2004-08-03 18:52 why hold bkl during do_coredump? Josh Aas
@ 2004-08-05 4:18 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2004-08-05 4:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Aas; +Cc: linux-kernel
Josh Aas <josha@sgi.com> wrote:
>
> I'm looking at not holding the bkl during do_coredump, but I can't
> figure out why its being held in the first place. I can only think of
> the need to not mess with the current memory map, but mmap_sem is
> currently held as well. Anybody know what is going on here?
The only thing I can see in there which needs lock_kernel() is the access
to core_pattern - it's changed by sysctl, which also takes lock_kernel().
Probably, adding a lock_kernel() and a comment around the call to
format_corename() should suffice. Please make format_corename() static
while you're there.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-08-05 4:21 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-08-03 18:52 why hold bkl during do_coredump? Josh Aas
2004-08-05 4:18 ` Andrew Morton
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox