Re: [RFC][PATCH] Prevent overriding of Symbols in the Kernel,avoiding Undefined behaviour

[Rusty Russell]

On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 11:16 +0530, Ashutosh Naik wrote:
> On 12/14/05, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > We already do this to resolve (more) symbols, so I don't see it as a
> > problem.  However, I believe that lock is redundant here: we need both
> > locks to write the list, but either is sufficient for reading, and we
> > already hold the sem.
> 
> Was just wondering, in that case, if we really need the spinlock in
> resolve_symbol() function, where there exists a spinlock around the
> __find_symbol() function

Yes, I think that's redundant as well.  We're not altering the module
list itself, so either of the two locks is sufficient, and we have the
semaphore.

Patch welcome!
Rusty.
-- 
 ccontrol: http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/ccontrol

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/