Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] tracing/profile: Fix profile_disable vs module_unload | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Tue, 25 Aug 2009 12:47:15 +0200 |
| |
On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 12:39 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Do you really wish to burden every tracepoint user with the extra > > logic needed to deal with modules? > > Not necessarily - i'm just outlining why i think that the 'dont > allow subsystems to utilize tracepoint callbacks' is a restriction > we should not live with voluntarily.
Well, unless someone has a bright idea that's what it comes down to. And not having to care about modules when using tracepoint wins hands down for me.
The issue seems rather simple:
Either we force everybody who uses a tracepoint to care about modules, be this by having to do try_get_module() themselves or by having to listen to some notifier and have their callback forcibly dropped on unload -- both suck IMO, suck very hard indeed.
Or by having modules that use their own tracepoint be stuck, because once you block unlock when a tracepoint has callbacks, and it installed a callback on itself, its not going to go away.
And since I don't care about modules at all and really wish they'd never been invented...
| |