Re: [PATCH 1/1] mlock: split the shmlock_user_lock spinlock into peruser_struct spinlock

[rajman mekaco]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/10/2012 09:34 AM, rajman mekaco wrote:
>
>> Any updates on this ?
>
>
> There is still no usecase to demonstrate a problem, so no real
> justification to merge the patch.  Coming up with such a usecase
> is up to the submitter of the patch.

Maybe you didn't read my last email:
If 2 different user-mode processes executing on 2 CPUs under 2 different
users want to access the same shared memory through the
shmctl(SHM_LOCK) / shmget(SHM_HUGETLB) / usr_shm_lock
primitives, they could compete/spin even though their user_structs
are different.

Can you please correct me if I am missing some crucial point of understanding ?

Or did you mean that I should update the ChangeLog with this kind of
description ?

>
> --
> All rights reversed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/