[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201010051544.52269.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 15:44:51 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Brandon Philips <brandon@...p.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG 2.6.36-rc6] list corruption in module_bug_finalize
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 09:13:38 am Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> The patch below cures it.
Using module_mutex here is just lazy... Here's 5c, go buy your own lock :)
> /*
> - * Strictly speaking this should have a spinlock to protect against
> - * traversals, but since we only traverse on BUG()s, a spinlock
> - * could potentially lead to deadlock and thus be counter-productive.
> + * We need to take module_mutex here to protect the list add, though
> + * it won't protect against a concurrent BUG().
> */
> + mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
> list_add(&mod->bug_list, &module_bug_list);
> + mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> void module_bug_cleanup(struct module *mod)
> {
> + mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
> list_del(&mod->bug_list);
> + mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> }
>
> #else
>
--
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