From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sgi.com (sgi.SGI.COM [192.48.153.1]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA00116 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:17:24 -0500 Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:11:06 -0800 From: kanoj@kulten.engr.sgi.com (Kanoj Sarcar) Message-Id: <9902191011.ZM28911@kulten.engr.sgi.com> In-Reply-To: Neil Booth "vmalloc.c question" (Feb 19, 7:24pm) References: <36CD3BCE.9D2AE90E@earthling.net> Subject: Re: vmalloc.c question Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Neil Booth , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Feb 19, 7:24pm, Neil Booth wrote: > Subject: vmalloc.c question > I have a simple question about vmalloc.c. I'm probably missing something > obvious, but it appears to me that the list "vmlist" of the kernel's > virtual memory areas is not protected by any kind of locking mechanism, > and thus subject to races. (e.g. two CPUs trying to insert a new virtual > memory block in the same place at the same time in get_vm_area). > > Or what am I missing? > Actually, the ia32 specific ioremap function also calls into the get_vm_area() function. I was assuming that the giant kernel_lock protects the "vmlist". Kanoj -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm my@address' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/