lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] Prevent overriding of Symbols in the Kernel, avoiding Undefined behaviour
    On 12/14/05, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
    > We already do this to resolve (more) symbols, so I don't see it as a
    > problem. However, I believe that lock is redundant here: we need both
    > locks to write the list, but either is sufficient for reading, and we
    > already hold the sem.

    Was just wondering, in that case, if we really need the spinlock in
    resolve_symbol() function, where there exists a spinlock around the
    __find_symbol() function

    Cheers
    Ashutosh
    -
    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: 2005-12-14 06:48    [W:0.020 / U:1.156 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site