linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/8] remoteproc: add omap implementation

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <BANLkTikGaYjjuXOb0ANM4+-j3nWFJ1BaCg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jun 2011 09:31:19 -0600
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
Cc:	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	davinci-linux-open-source 
	<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"Guzman Lugo, Fernando" <fernando.lugo@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/8] remoteproc: add omap implementation

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Grant Likely
> <grant.likely@...retlab.ca> wrote:
>> Very little for me to comment on here.  However, something I just
>> noticed.  Why is it necessary to pass in THIS_MODULE to the
>> rproc_register function?  Having a reference to the pdev gives you the
>> pointer to the driver, which has the THIS_MODULE value in it.  That
>> should be sufficient.
>
> Nice one, thanks !
>
>> /me also isn't sure if incrementing the refcount on the module is the
>> best way to prevent the rproc from going away, but I haven't dug into
>> the details in the driver code to find out.  Drivers can get unbound
>> from devices without the driver being unloaded, so I imagine there is
>> an in-use count on the device itself that would prevent driver
>> unbinding.
>
> Yes, increasing the module refcount is necessary to prevent the user
> from removing the driver when the rproc is used.

That prevents removing the module which necessitates unbinding the
device.  However, I believe it is possible to unbind a driver
/without/ the module being unloaded.  My question (for which I don't
have an answer) is whether or not there is a way to increment a
refcount on users of the driver bound to the device..

g.
--
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/