lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/6] Fix "x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()"
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 08:57:38PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
> at 1:25 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> 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 don’t know. I’m 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.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-06 23:42    [W:0.066 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site