![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 07:31:36PM +1100, Keith Owens wrote: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 05:59:22 +0100, > Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote: > >On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 08:57:45PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > Any options I missed? > >> > >> Stop using the notifier chains from NMI context - it's too hard. Use a > >> fixed-size array in the NMI code instead.> >> >Or just don't unregister. That is what I did for the debug notifiers. > > Unregister is not the only problem. Chain traversal races with > register as well. Either it follows the old next or the new next. Both are valid. The only problem is that there isn't a write barrier between n->next = *list; *list=n; in notifier_chain_register, which might hit on non i386 architectures. -Andi - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-11-28 13:11 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||