[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Is module refcounting racy?

On Thu, 1 Apr 2010, Nick Piggin wrote:
> I think it can be done racelessly with my patch, which is not really too
> much overhead. I think if this is considered too much, then we should
> either fix code and preferably de-export and remove module_refcount from
> drivers, or remove module removal completely.

I doubt your patch matters too much, but I like it conceptually and it
seems to be a nice basis for perhaps doing something clever in the long

[ ie avoiding the stop_machine and instead perhaps doing some optimistic
thing like "see if we seem to be unused right now, then unregister us,
and see - after unregistering - that the usage counts haven't increased,
and re-register if they have. ]

So I'd like to apply it as a "good improvement, even if module unloading
which is the only thing that _should_ care deeply should already be under

But I'd like an ack or two first.


 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-01 18:03    [W:0.055 / U:10.812 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site