> On Jan 16, 2019, at 11:54 PM, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 16:32:59 -0800 > Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> From: Nadav Amit <namit@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> It seems dangerous to allow code modifications to take place >> concurrently with module unloading. So take the text_mutex while the >> memory of the module is freed. > > At that point, since the module itself is removed from module list, > it seems no actual harm. Or would you have any concern? So it appears that you are right and all the users of text_poke() and text_poke_bp() do install module notifiers, and remove the module from their internal data structure when they are done (*). As long as they prevent text_poke*() to be called concurrently (e.g., using jump_label_lock()), everything is fine. Having said that, the question is whether you “trust” text_poke*() users to do so. text_poke() description does not day explicitly that you need to prevent modules from being removed. What do you say? (*) I am not sure about kgdb, but it probably does not matter much
