Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 05:27:10PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >
> > Do you know if anyone has fixed the lazy vmalloc code? I know of
> > as of early 2.4 it was broken on alpha. At the time I noticed it I didn't
> > have time to persue it, but before I forget to even put in a bug
> > report I thought I'd ask if you know anything about it?
>
> On alpha it's racy if you set CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC y (so don't do
> that as you don't need it). As long as you use only 1 entry of the pgd
> for the whole vmalloc space (CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC n) alpha is
> safe.
Hmm. I was having problems reproducible with
CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC n.
Enabling the large vmalloc was my work around, because the large
vmalloc whet back to the prelazy allocation code.
I was getting repeatable problems inside of an mtd driver. The
problem I had was entries failed to propagate across different tasks.
I think it was something like the first pgd was lazily allocated and
not propagated.
I don't have a SRM on my 264 alpha so alpha (for reference on which
code paths were followed.
>
> OTOH x86 is racy and there's no workaround available at the moment.
GH
Well racy is easier to work with than just plain non-functional.
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
