* Oleg Nesterov [2012-11-25 23:33:50]:
> uprobe_register() and uprobe_unregister() are the only users of
> mutex_lock(uprobes_hash(inode)), and the only reason why we can't
> simply remove it is that we need to ensure that delete_uprobe() is
> not possible after alloc_uprobe() and before
* Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com [2012-11-25 23:33:50]:
uprobe_register() and uprobe_unregister() are the only users of
mutex_lock(uprobes_hash(inode)), and the only reason why we can't
simply remove it is that we need to ensure that delete_uprobe() is
not possible after alloc_uprobe() and
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 11:33:50PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> uprobe_register() and uprobe_unregister() are the only users of
> mutex_lock(uprobes_hash(inode)), and the only reason why we can't
> simply remove it is that we need to ensure that delete_uprobe() is
> not possible after
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 11:33:50PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
uprobe_register() and uprobe_unregister() are the only users of
mutex_lock(uprobes_hash(inode)), and the only reason why we can't
simply remove it is that we need to ensure that delete_uprobe() is
not possible after alloc_uprobe()
uprobe_register() and uprobe_unregister() are the only users of
mutex_lock(uprobes_hash(inode)), and the only reason why we can't
simply remove it is that we need to ensure that delete_uprobe() is
not possible after alloc_uprobe() and before consumer_add().
IOW, we need to ensure that when we
uprobe_register() and uprobe_unregister() are the only users of
mutex_lock(uprobes_hash(inode)), and the only reason why we can't
simply remove it is that we need to ensure that delete_uprobe() is
not possible after alloc_uprobe() and before consumer_add().
IOW, we need to ensure that when we
6 matches
Mail list logo
