lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] Raceless module interface
Hi,

On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Rusty Russell wrote:

> Nope, that's one of the two problems. Read my previous post: the
> other is partial initialization.
>
> Your patch is two-stage delete, with the additional of a usecount
> function. So you have to move the usecount from the module to each
> object it registers: great for filesystems, but I don't think it buys
> you anything (since they were easy anyway).

I'm aware of the init problem, what I described was the core problem,
which prevents any further cleanup.
The usecount is optional, the only important question a module must be
able to answer is: Are there any objects/references belonging to the
module? It's a simple yes/no question. If a module can't answer that, it
likely has more problem than just module unloading.
How that interface is exactly done is open for discussion and needs to be
specified.

> Moreover, I don't see where your patch prevented someone increasing
> the module count during try_unregister_module(), so that check is
> pointless (do it in userspace unless they specify rmmod -f).

I don't see your problem, if someone looks up a module, he gets a
reference to the module structure, if a reference count goes to zero the
module must be completely freed. State changes are protected with a
separate lock, if a module is loaded/unloaded an extra reference is used
to prevent module removal.

bye, Roman

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.099 / U:2.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site