Rogier Wolff wrote:
> We're trying to make the module refcounting 'secure' against
> concurrent SMP unloads.
>
> For example in net/atm/resources.c:
Yeah, a lot of the add/remove device ATM code (and, IMO, even the vcc
open/close) code is pretty suspect. If you want to look through and
liberally sprinkle lock_kernel() everywhere, that wouldn't really be a
bad idea. A lot of this code hasn't changed much since the 1.3 days,
so I don't know if anyone ever gave a good look at its SMP friendlyness.
At one point I cleaned up a few problems, but I'n not sure I got them
all. I think most of the races that are easy to trigger are gone (at
least in the common code, can't be sure about all the drivers).
As far as module_unload, isn't that protected by lock_kernel? What am
I missing?
-Mitch
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
