Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:20:01 +0100 (BST) | From | John Levon <> | Subject | Re: execve replacement. |
| |
On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Brian Gerst wrote:
> Even your overloader has a small module unload race. The only 100% > race-free way is to put module usage counting into the core kernel, like > the VFS changes with ->open that were done in 2.3.x. This would mean > added overhead for all syscalls, so many people would oppose this. > > --
Whose overloader ? I didn't write it ...
anyway, you can just put refcounts in your hijacked system calls; that is the safe way to do it, and doesn't require any kernel patches, just extra cost in the intercepted system calls.
e.g. :
my_syswhatever(...) { MOD_INC_USE_COUNT; original_syswhatever(...); MOD_DEC_USE_COUNT; }
Can you explain to me the race with this approach ?
thanks john
-- "The Internet is a shallow and unreliable electronic repository of dirty pictures, inaccurate rumors, bad spelling and worse grammar, inhabited largely by people with no demonstrable social skills." - Chronicle of Higher Education
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |