Messages in this thread | | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Proposed module init race fix. | Date | Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:48:57 +1100 |
| |
In message <D4E37953801@vcnet.vc.cvut.cz> you write: > On 15 Jan 03 at 20:06, Rusty Russell wrote: > > In message <200301150846.AAA01104@adam.yggdrasil.com> you write: > > > Could you explain this "random behavior" of 2.4 a bit more? > > > As far as I know, if a module's init function fails, it must > > > unregister everything that it has registered up to that point. > > > > And if someone's using it, the module gets unloaded underneath them. > > No. Unregister will go to sleep until it is safe to unregister > driver. See unregister_netdevice for perfect example, but I'm sure > that there are other unregister functions which make sure that after > unregister it is OK to destroy everything.
And see remove_proc_entry, or notifier_chain_unregister for counterexamples. No doubt there are others.
Rusty. -- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - 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/
| |