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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site