> >> It's not really just the module information. If I can, say, get
> >> callbacks from something even after I unregister, I may well
> >> have destroyed the data I need to process the callbacks, and
> >> oops or worse.
> >
> >Actually, if module exit synchronizes properly, even the
> >return-after-removal case shouldn't exist, because we'd simply
> >wait for this call to return.
> >
> >Hmm, interesting. Did I just make the whole problem go away,
> >or is travel fatigue playing tricks on my brain ? :-)
>
> That was one of the solutions proposed by Rusty, that is basically
> waiting for all CPUs to have scheduled upon exit from module_exit
> and before doing the actual removal.
That seems reasonable... lighter version of freeze_processes() I was
thinking about.
Pavel
-- Worst form of spam? Adding advertisment signatures ala sourceforge.net. What goes next? Inserting advertisment *into* email? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/