* Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > --- a/kernel/kprobes.c > +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c > @@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work) > cpus_read_lock(); > mutex_lock(&text_mutex); > /* Lock modules while optimizing kprobes */ > - mutex_lock(&module_mutex); > + lock_modules(); > > /* > * Step 1: Unoptimize kprobes and collect cleaned (unused and disarmed) > @@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work) > /* Step 4: Free cleaned kprobes after quiesence period */ > do_free_cleaned_kprobes(); > > - mutex_unlock(&module_mutex); > + unlock_modules(); > mutex_unlock(&text_mutex); > cpus_read_unlock(); BTW., it would be nice to expand on the comments above - exactly which parts of the modules code is being serialized against and why? We already hold the text_mutex here, which should protect against most kprobes related activities interfering - and it's unclear (to me) which part of the modules code is being serialized with here, and the 'lock modules while optimizing kprobes' comments is unhelpful. :-) Thanks, Ingo
