Hello. Not for inclusion yet, only for the early review. I didn't even try to test these changes, and I am not expert in this area. And even _if_ this code is correct, I need to re-split these changes anyway, update the changelogs, etc. Questions: - does it make sense? - can it work or I missed something "in general" ? Why: - It would be nice to remove a member from task_struct. - Afaics, the usage of uprobes_srcu does not look right, at least in theory, see 6/6. The comment above delete_uprobe() says: The current unregistering thread waits till all other threads have hit a breakpoint, to acquire the uprobes_treelock before the uprobe is removed from the rbtree. but synchronize_srcu() can only help if a thread which have hit the breakpoint has already called srcu_read_lock(). It can't synchronize with read_lock "in future", and there is a small window. We could probably add another synchronize_sched() before synchronize_srcu(), but this doesn't look very nice and - I am not sure yet, but perhaps with these changes we can also kill mm->uprobes_state.count. Any review is very much appreciated. Oleg. include/linux/sched.h | 1 - kernel/events/uprobes.c | 117 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 2 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) -- 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>