[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0904191437250.31802@vinegar-pot.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 13:51:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tim Abbott <tabbott@....EDU>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Anders Kaseorg <andersk@....edu>,
Jeffrey B Arnold <jbarnold@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] ftrace: use module notifier for function tracer
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009, Rusty Russell wrote:
> I think you need to do something else in general. Share the module_mutex for
> the ftrace code? The ksplice guys have a similar issue, so maybe we should
> generalize this into a "kernel_text" mutex?
Yes, a kernel_text mutex is on my list of things to propose once Ksplice
gets merged.
There are at present several systems that modify the kernel text after a
machine is booted (e.g. dynamic ftrace and toggling of smp_locks when
hotplugging a cpu). Currently, they avoid stepping on each other by only
making changes inside stop_machine.
However, Ksplice does its run-pre matching checks outside stop_machine,
and Ksplice needs a way to prevent e.g. dynamic ftrace from changing the
code out from under it between those checks and actually applying the
patches [1]. A kernel_text mutex would be a reasonable solution to this
problem.
-Tim Abbott
[1] At present this isn't a real problem because Ksplice and ftrace
conflict with each other for unrelated reasons.
--
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