[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <451C5E3B.60204@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 16:43:55 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@....de>,
Hugh Dickens <hugh@...itas.com>,
Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] Generic BUG handling.
Andrew Morton wrote:
> What is the locking for these lists? I don't see much in here. It has
> implications for code which wants to do BUG while holding that lock..
>
There's no locking. This is a direct copy of the original powerpc
code. I assume, but haven't checked, that there's a lock to serialize
module loading/unloading, so the insertion/deletion is all properly
synchronized.
The only other user is traversal when actually handling a bug; if you're
very unlucky this could happen while you're actually loading/unloading
and you would see the list in an inconsistent state. I guess we could
put a lock there, and trylock it on traversal; at least that would stop
a concurrent modload/unload from getting in there while we're trying to
walk the list.
> Shouldn't this be u64? ;)
>
I'll get right on that. And perhaps it should be signed if people
overshoot and introduce a negative number of BUGs.
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists