[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/8] Notifier chain update
    On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:

    > On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:34:12AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
    > > There are some limitations, which should not be too hard to live with.
    > > For atomic/blocking chains, registration and unregistration must
    > > always be done in a process context since the chain is protected by a
    > > mutex/rwsem. Also, a callout routine for a non-raw chain must not try
    > > to register or unregister entries on its own chain. (This did happen
    > > in a couple of places and the code had to be changed to avoid it.)
    > This is bad, as rwsems are pretty much guaranteed to be a cache miss on
    > smp systems, so their addition makes these code paths scale much more
    > poorly than is needed. Given the current approach to modules, would it
    > not make sense to simply require that any code that the notifier paths
    > touch simply remain loaded in the kernel? In that case rcu protection
    > of the pointers would suffice for the hooks.

    You can't use RCU protection around code that may sleep. Whether the code
    remains loaded in the kernel or is part of a removable module doesn't
    enter into it.

    Alan Stern

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-01-18 21:25    [W:0.020 / U:58.120 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site