Even if it was, I doubt the code ever knowingly relied upon it. If I
know that I'm protected under a lock, I rarely go to the trouble of
atomic operations.
The root of the problem is that the reference count is being relied on
for the wrong thing. There is a race on p->user between the
dup_task_struct() and whenever the atomic_inc(&p->user->__count)
occcurs. The user reference count needs to be incremented in
dup_task_struct(), before the copy occurs.
-- Dave Hansen haveblue@us.ibm.com- 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/