[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200725024834.GE17052@linux.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 05:48:34 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] kprobes: Remove dependency to the module_mutex
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:46:31PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:05:48 +0300
> Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Add lock_modules() and unlock_modules() wrappers for acquiring module_mutex
> > in order to remove the compile time dependency to it.
>
> This subject is a bit confusing. This is just wrapping modules_mutex in
> kpprobes. We still have compile time dependency, e.g. module_state, right?
Yes. This more like a preliminary change to make that happen. The
actual flagging is in 6/6 ("Remove CONFIG_MODULE dependency").
Maybe a better angle would be to make this update all sites that
deal with module_mutex [*] and base the whole rationale on that?
[*] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200725024227.GD17052@linux.intel.com/
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists