Re: [PATCH] Proposed module init race fix.
Rusty Russell (rusty@rustcorp.com.au)
Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:48:57 +1100
In message <D4E37953801@vcnet.vc.cvut.cz> you write:
> On 15 Jan 03 at 20:06, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > In message <200301150846.AAA01104@adam.yggdrasil.com> you write:
> > > Could you explain this "random behavior" of 2.4 a bit more?
> > > As far as I know, if a module's init function fails, it must
> > > unregister everything that it has registered up to that point.
> >
> > And if someone's using it, the module gets unloaded underneath them.
>
> No. Unregister will go to sleep until it is safe to unregister
> driver. See unregister_netdevice for perfect example, but I'm sure
> that there are other unregister functions which make sure that after
> unregister it is OK to destroy everything.
And see remove_proc_entry, or notifier_chain_unregister for
counterexamples. No doubt there are others.
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
-
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/