Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:40:13 -0800 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: Oops on 2.4.x invalid procfs i_ino value |
| |
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> Ouch, 2.4.21; this will be trouble. So next, what patches atop 2.4.21?
On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 04:35:18PM -0600, Brent Casavant wrote: > I wouldn't worry about the pid=0 issue -- I think it's most likely > due to the PAGG patches (http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg) causing > some sort of problem at process teardown (all the pid=0 processes are > in the process of exiting). > I'm more concerned about the (0 == pid & 0xffff) bug, which is present > in the unpatched mainline 2.4.x kernel. It seems that the easiest fix > is marking such pids as in-use at pidmap allocation, so that they are > never assigned to real tasks. I've got the code almost done, but need > to port it to top-of-tree before submitting a patch.
I see no 0 == pid & 0xffff nor any pidmap in unpatched 2.4.x. Also, please notice that pid & ~(PID_MAX-1) a.k.a. pid & ~0x7fff a.k.a. pid & 0xffff8000? And so it appears numerous checks of this form are already there.
Perhaps the pristine sources are not as pristine as one had hoped?
-- wli - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |