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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site