Re: Another idea for simplifying locking in kernel/module.c

From: Bill Davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
Date: Sat Jan 11 2003 - 09:46:23 EST

Next message: Bob_Trac: "Re: XFree86 vs. 2.5.54 - reboot"
Previous message: Bill Davidsen: "Re: [Lse-tech] Minature NUMA scheduler"
In reply to: Andre Hedrick: "Re: Another idea for simplifying locking in kernel/module.c"
Next in thread: Rusty Russell: "Re: Another idea for simplifying locking in kernel/module.c"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Andre Hedrick wrote:

>
> I'll bite .... what the flip is [unsafe] ??

Actually, I believe it means the modules doesn't use try_module_get
instead of the old I_cant_remember_the_name macro.

-- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.

- 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/

Next message: Bob_Trac: "Re: XFree86 vs. 2.5.54 - reboot"
Previous message: Bill Davidsen: "Re: [Lse-tech] Minature NUMA scheduler"
In reply to: Andre Hedrick: "Re: Another idea for simplifying locking in kernel/module.c"
Next in thread: Rusty Russell: "Re: Another idea for simplifying locking in kernel/module.c"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 22:00:37 EST