From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Aug 24 18:33:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from earth.backplane.com (earth-nat-cw.backplane.com [208.161.114.67]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F6E637B408 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:33:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@earth.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by earth.backplane.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) id f7P1WfR03688; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:32:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:32:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Matt Dillon Message-Id: <200108250132.f7P1WfR03688@earth.backplane.com> To: Julian Elischer Cc: Alfred Perlstein , David Greenman , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Possible race in i386/i386/pmap.c:pmap_copy() References: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG : :Thinking about this a bit more.... :doesn't each process ahve it's own PTD?, so a process could sleep and :another could run but it would have a differnt PTD :so they could change that PTDE with impunity :because when teh current process runs again it get's its own :ptd back again.. Hmm. Ok, I think you are right. APTDpde is what is being loaded and that points into the user page table directory page, which is per-process. So APTDpde should be per-process. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message