Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:33:34 -0800 | From | "David C. Hansen" <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Change locking in block_dev.c:do_open() |
| |
Ryan Cumming wrote: > On December 12, 2001 16:39, David C. Hansen wrote: > > We can add a semaphore which must be acquired before a module can be > > unloaded, and hold it over the area where the module must not be > > unloaded. We could replace the unload_lock spinlock with a semaphore, > > which I'll call it unload_sem here. It would look something like this: > Why not use a read-write semaphore? The sections that require the module to > stay resident use a read lock, and module unloading aquires a write lock. In > addition to containing the evil, evil BKL, you might actually get a tangiable > scalability gain out of it. Cool idea. I'll do that. Now that we have those locking primitives in the kernel I wish that we used them more often. -- David C. Hansen dave@sr71.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |