[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081030203810.GM27407@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:38:10 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, srostedt@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ftrace: nmi safe code modification
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > + /* make sure NMIs see the cleared bit */
> > + smp_mb();
> > +
> > + wait_for_nmi();
> > +
> > + return mod_code_status;
> > +}
>
> I guess the weakness here is that the code will only allow a single
> contiguous hunk of text to be modified. One could envisage
> situations where two or more separate areas of memory need to be
> modified atomically/together.
>
> I guess we can cross that bridge when we fall off it.
yeah - the whole 'transaction' concept can be extended easily, in just
one place.
Not that i think that it would really be useful to go beyond the
current (target,len) abstraction - the less complex code patching is
done, the better.
Ingo
--
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