Nick Piggin wrote:
Janak Desai wrote:
-tsk->min_flt = tsk->maj_flt = 0;
-tsk->nvcsw = tsk->nivcsw = 0;
+/*
+ * If the process memory is being duplicated as part of the
+ * unshare system call, we are working with the current process
+ * and not a newly allocated task s
Thanks again for your review. I understand the problems that
you highlighted. I will rework the code and this time create
test programs that test these aspects of unsharing that I had
missed. Basically, the four areas that I have to fix are
- Investigate impact on aio and futex
- Handle possib
Thanks Chris and Nick for your feedback. I am investigating the issues
that you raised. Hopefully I will address them by COB tomorrow.
-Janak
Chris Wright wrote:
* Janak Desai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
diff -Naurp linux-2.6.13-mm1/kernel/fork.c
linux-2.6.13-mm1+unshare-patch1/kernel/fork.
Janak Desai wrote:
- tsk->min_flt = tsk->maj_flt = 0;
- tsk->nvcsw = tsk->nivcsw = 0;
+ /*
+* If the process memory is being duplicated as part of the
+* unshare system call, we are working with the current process
+* and not a newly allocated task stru
* Janak Desai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> diff -Naurp linux-2.6.13-mm1/kernel/fork.c
> linux-2.6.13-mm1+unshare-patch1/kernel/fork.c
> --- linux-2.6.13-mm1/kernel/fork.c2005-09-07 13:25:01.0 +
> +++ linux-2.6.13-mm1+unshare-patch1/kernel/fork.c 2005-09-07
> 13:40:11.0
5 matches
Mail list logo
