* Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> @@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work)
> cpus_read_lock();
> mutex_lock(&text_mutex);
> /* Lock modules while optimizing kprobes */
> - mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
> + lock_modules();
>
> /*
> * Step 1: Unoptimize kprobes and collect cleaned (unused and disarmed)
> @@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work)
> /* Step 4: Free cleaned kprobes after quiesence period */
> do_free_cleaned_kprobes();
>
> - mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> + unlock_modules();
> mutex_unlock(&text_mutex);
> cpus_read_unlock();
BTW., it would be nice to expand on the comments above - exactly which
parts of the modules code is being serialized against and why?
We already hold the text_mutex here, which should protect against most
kprobes related activities interfering - and it's unclear (to me)
which part of the modules code is being serialized with here, and the
'lock modules while optimizing kprobes' comments is unhelpful. :-)
Thanks,
Ingo
