On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Li Zhong wrote: > > I don't get why try_module_get() matters here. We can't call into > > ->store if the object at hand is already destroyed and the underlying > > module can't go away if the target device is still alive. > > try_module_get() doesn't actually protect the object. Why does that > > matter? This is self removal, right? Can you please take a look at > > kernfs_remove_self()? > > This is about one process writing something to driver attributes, and > one process trying to unload this driver. > > I think try_module_get() could detect whether the driver is being > unloaded, and if not, prevent it from being unloaded, so it could > protect the object here by not allow the driver to be unloaded. That isn't how try_module_get() works. If the module is being unloaded, try_module_get() simply fails. It does not prevent the module from being unloaded -- that's why its name begins with "try". Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
