Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Felipe Contreras
Date: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 - 2:39 am

On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com> wrote:

The problem is if the user-space process crashes exactly in the middle
of it, *before* completing. With locks there's no problem, as
proc_un_map() would wait for the lock in my patch. In your patch it
would not wait, just return -EBUSY.


Not if a proc_*_dma() is still running.

There's a very narrow timing window where this could happen, but it is there.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Mon Dec 20, 11:43 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Tue Dec 21, 9:44 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Mon Dec 27, 6:55 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Tue Dec 28, 3:36 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Tue Dec 28, 5:12 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Tue Dec 28, 5:24 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Wed Dec 29, 2:39 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Wed Dec 29, 2:42 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] staging: tidspbridge: protect dmm_map properly, Felipe Contreras, (Wed Dec 29, 3:06 am)