> No. Freeze uses kernel threads not smp_call_function. So it would have
> to be
>
> CPU1 CPU2
> rmmod spin_lock(&card->lock);
> schedule();
> spin on freeze
>
> scheduling with a spinlock held is usually a bug.
CPU1 CPU2
down(&lock)
rmmod
freeze freeze
cleanup_module
down(&lock)
Now either #1 freeze yields in this case which is the existing behaviour with
a lot of do nothing code added or it keeps CPU1 frozen in which case you are
screwed.
Or am I missing something
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 26 2000 - 21:00:05 EST