Hello, On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 04:23:20PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > Whatever we do, we can't "stop" other threads at the time when > thread 'a' traps. All we can do is to try to shrink the window. Yeah, "at the time" can't even be defined preciesly. Order of operation isn't clearly defined in absence of synchronization constructs. In the described example, there's unspecified amount of time (or cycles rather) between the load of the global variable and the thread faulting. Anything could have happened inbetween no matter how immediate core dump was. As long as we're reasonably immediate, which I think we already are, I don't think there's much which needs to be changed. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>