Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 Dec 2005 15:46:47 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] protect remove_proc_entry |
| |
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(remove_proc_lock); >
I'll take a closer look at this next week.
The official way of protecting the contents of a directory from concurrent lookup or modification is to take its i_sem. But procfs is totally weird and that approach may well not be practical here. We'd certainly prefer not to rely upon lock_kernel(). - 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/
| |