On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > However, this code is incorrect (it was incorrect before you touched it, > so not your fault). Moving it to a list makes it a lot worse though > because it introduces the possibility of dereferencing an invalid > pointer. The hooks need to grab the spinlock before parsing the list. > > I've got a patch which I'll post. I'd appreciate it if you can test > also. > > In actual fact, I'd like to replace the spinlock with a mutex, but that > requires some auditing to make sure there aren't any users from an > atomic context. I thought about doing that as well actually, but left it for later. It looks safe at first sight, but as you mention we cannot exclude a few users will break as a consequence of such a switch. In any case, I plan to give it a try once that big chunk is merged. Alex. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
