Messages in this thread | | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Migrating net/sched to new module interface | Date | Fri, 14 Feb 2003 23:04:13 +1100 |
| |
In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302141035270.1336-100000@serv> you write: > It's not the same, please see: > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=104284223130775&w=2 > I explained why the current module locking is more complex and why it's > actually a three stage delete.
No, here is where you show *your* ignorance of kernel locking idioms, and that your axiom is that "the new system is more complex".
I suggest you read the kernel locking guide: it's in the kernel sources in Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.*, try "make psdocs".
> Rusty, above are real problems, the module locking fixes these problems > during module_init/module_exit, but how can these problems fixed in the > other cases and how does the module locking help?
This isn't even a sensible question: "This is not a module problem. How does module locking help?"
You're wasting your own valuable time, too. 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/
| |