[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1189040290.12261.172.camel@jcmlaptop>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 20:58:10 -0400
From: Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>, adam@...drasil.com,
jcm@...masters.org, kaber@...sh.net,
netfilter-devel@...ts.netfilter.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix (improve) deadlock condition on module removal
netfilter socket option removal
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 08:41 +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 16:26 -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-09-04 at 16:30 -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> >
> > > 2nd of two patches. This patch enhances modprobe to operate like rmmod
> > > in non-blocking mode. It also adds a -w option to allow for explicit blocking
> > > operation.
> >
> > As I suspected, this patch isn't in the tree. I am going to commit it
> > now because it makes sense. I'm also going to sort out moving things to
> > kernel.org this afternoon while I'm at it - I don't want to confuse
> > people with kerneltools.org any more now I've got a kernel.org acc.
>
> 1) You don't want to hand the "wait" flag (ie ~O_NONBLOCK) to
> sub-rmmods,
>
> 2) You need to do something about this code if wait is specified:
>
> if (usecount != 0) {
> if (!ignore_inuse)
> error("Module %s is in use.\n", name);
> goto remove_rest;
> }
Goodness, I suck. I'll get it fixed properly.
Jon.
-
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