Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Mar 2003 19:54:28 -0500 (EST) | From | Zwane Mwaikambo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] (1/8) Eliminate brlock in psnap |
| |
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Paul McKenney wrote:
> You are saying that we can omit locking because this is > called only from a module-exit function, and thus protected > by the module_mutex semaphore? (I must defer to > others who have a better handle on modules...) > > If in fact only one module-exit function can be > executing at a given time, then we should be able to > use the following approach:
Yes the ->exit call is protected by module_mutex globally.
> Module unloading should be rare enough to tolerate > the grace period under the module_mutex, right? > > Thoughts?
I would agree. However can't unregister_snap_client be used in other paths apart from module_unload? I wouldn't worry too much since if register_snap_client and unregister_snap_client for the same protocol races it's a bug in the caller's code. The safe RCU list removal and synchronize_kernel should protect us from sane usage.
Zwane - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |