lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Module : call synchronize_sched() between module exit() and free.
    Hi -

    On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 10:27:51PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
    > [...]
    > Actually, it's not placing a marker/tracepoint in a module which causes
    > a problem, this is a simple function call after all, and correctly dealt
    > with by current module.c code.
    > [...]

    Just to spell it out, it is this scenario I'd like to see documented:

    module-foo.c:
    foo() { ... trace_mark (foo, "..."); ... }

    module-bar.c:
    setup() { ... marker_probe_register ("foo" , ..., &foo_handler ); }
    teardown() { ... marker_probe_unregister ("foo" , ..., &foo_handler ); }
    foo_handler() { }

    1) module-foo loads
    2) module-bar loads
    3) module-bar.c:setup()
    4) module-foo unloads

    What happens here? Certainly no more calls to foo_handler, but is
    that all? (Would it not be desirable for an active marker to cause
    module-foo's refcount to increase, so as to prevent unloading at this
    time?)

    5) module-bar.c:teardown()

    Can this teardown code succeed fully even if module-foo is already
    dead and gone?


    - FChE


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-07-30 13:45    [W:0.040 / U:150.612 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site