Re: [PATCH (2.4)] atomic use count for proc_dir_entry

From: Linus Torvalds (torvalds@transmeta.com)
Date: Thu Nov 16 2000 - 16:14:10 EST

Next message: Chmouel Boudjnah: "Re: PROBLEM: Bad PCI detection of a sound card"
Previous message: David Feuer: "Re: [BUG] Inconsistent behaviour of rmdir"
In reply to: Dan Aloni: "[PATCH (2.4)] atomic use count for proc_dir_entry"
Next in thread: Dan Aloni: "Re: [PATCH (2.4)] atomic use count for proc_dir_entry"
Reply: Dan Aloni: "Re: [PATCH (2.4)] atomic use count for proc_dir_entry"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Dan Aloni wrote:
>
> Makes procfs use an atomic use count for dir entries, to avoid using
> the Big kernel lock. Axboe says it looks ok.

There's a race there. Look at what happens if de_put() races with
remove_proc_entry(): we'd do free_proc_entry() twice. Not good.

Leave the kernel lock for now.

Linus

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

Next message: Chmouel Boudjnah: "Re: PROBLEM: Bad PCI detection of a sound card"
Previous message: David Feuer: "Re: [BUG] Inconsistent behaviour of rmdir"
In reply to: Dan Aloni: "[PATCH (2.4)] atomic use count for proc_dir_entry"
Next in thread: Dan Aloni: "Re: [PATCH (2.4)] atomic use count for proc_dir_entry"
Reply: Dan Aloni: "Re: [PATCH (2.4)] atomic use count for proc_dir_entry"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 23 2000 - 21:00:11 EST