Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] Fix "x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()"

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 07:58:40PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
> > With that CR3 trickery, we can rid ourselves of the text_mutex
> > requirement, since concurrent text_poke is 'safe'. That would clean up
> > the kgdb code quite a bit.
> 
> I donât know. Iâm somewhat worried with multiple mechanisms potentially
> changing the same code at the same time - and maybe ending up with some
> mess.

kgdb only pokes INT3, that should be pretty safe.