Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:13:37 +0530 | From | "Vamsi Krishna S ." <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Notifier for significant events on i386 |
| |
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 03:16:39AM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:51:53PM +0530, Vamsi Krishna S . wrote: > > <snip> > > > > I am considering using a RCU-based list for notifier chains. > > Corey has done some work on these lines to add NMI notifier > > chain, I think it should be generalised on for all notifiers. > > A coherent explanation of how notifier locking is supposed to work > would be wonderful to have. I'd like to register notifiers but am > pig ignorant of how to lock my structures down to work with it. > Unless I am missing something, notifiers have always been racy. No amount of locking you do in individual modules to prevent races will help as the notifier chain is walked inside notifier_call_chain() in kernel/sys.c. One would need to add some form of locking there (*) so that users of notifier chains need not worry about races/locking at all.
(*) converting the notifier chain to an RCU-based list guarentees to modules using the notifier chains that their handlers will not be called once the handler is unregistered.
> Bill Vamsi. -- Vamsi Krishna S. Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore. Ph: +91 80 5044959 Internet: vamsi@in.ibm.com - 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/
| |