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

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 08:57:38PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
> at 1:25 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Maybe I misunderstand your point. If you want me to get rid of text_mutex
> completely,

No, just the ugly things kgdb does with it.