linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] module: implement module_inhibit

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46F915AC.4030301@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Sep 2007 23:05:32 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	cornelia.huck@...ibm.com, greg@...ah.com,
	stern@...land.harvard.edu, kay.sievers@...y.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] module: implement module_inhibit_unload()

Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 17:36 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Hmmm.... There doesn't seem to any reason why the blocking should be
>> after calling ->exit().  And, yeah, it would be more useful and
>> intuitive if blocking happens before ->exit().  What do you think?
> 
> *That* I have no problem with.
> 
> I was going to say "just grab a reference to every module" except if a
> new module is loaded you don't know about it.
> 
> If you move your blocking, it seems fine.

Great, I think I was too occupied with the sysfs case when I was writing
it.  I'll update the patch.  Thanks a lot.

-- 
tejun
-
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/