Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964873AbWIIWSz (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Sep 2006 18:18:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964970AbWIIWSz (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Sep 2006 18:18:55 -0400 Received: from taganka54-host.corbina.net ([213.234.233.54]:9172 "EHLO mail.screens.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964873AbWIIWSy (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Sep 2006 18:18:54 -0400 Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 02:18:39 +0400 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Jean Delvare , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 0/3] proc: bye bye tasklist_lock Message-ID: <20060909221839.GA141@oleg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 456 Lines: 14 fs/proc/ does not use tasklist_lock anymore. These patches are simple enough and do not depend on each other. The only problem I don't know how to really test them. Can anybody recommend a stress-test? Oleg. - 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/