lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    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
    run.

    [ 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
    stop-machine".

    But I'd like an ack or two first.

    Linus


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-04-01 18:03    [W:0.029 / U:29.632 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site