From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com>,
ak@suse.de, sekharan@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, paulmck@us.ibm.com,
Douglas_Warzecha@dell.com, Abhay_Salunke@dell.com,
achim_leubner@adaptec.com, dmp@davidmpye.dyndns.org
Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: [PATCH 0/7]: Fix for unsafe notifier chain
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 14:03:29 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051127220329.GA17786@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051127115640.3073f8e3.akpm@osdl.org>
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 11:56:40AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> We're saying that kernel/sys.c:notifier_lock should be removed and that all
> callers of notifier_chain_register(), notifier_chain_unregister() and
> notifier_call_chain() should be changed to define and use their own lock.
>
> So the _callers_ get to decide whether they're going to use down(),
> spin_lock(), down_read(), read_lock(), preempt_disable(), local_irq_disable()
> or whatever.
I completely agree. I just watched in mute horror as Chandra and Alan
spun off into the rcu blackhole trying to create one-size-fits-all
notifiers.
Making the user do the locking it needs to do is simple and sane.
And the reason USB's notifiers are implemented correctly, is they don't
use the notifier core, but rather, reimplemented their own, due to the
locking mess.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-27 22:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-23 23:37 [PATCH 0/7]: Fix for unsafe notifier chain Chandra Seetharaman
2005-11-27 4:07 ` Andrew Morton
2005-11-27 13:47 ` [Lse-tech] " Andi Kleen
2005-11-27 15:59 ` Keith Owens
2005-11-27 17:27 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-27 17:39 ` Keith Owens
2005-11-27 19:56 ` Andrew Morton
2005-11-27 22:03 ` Greg KH [this message]
2005-11-28 2:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-11-28 4:57 ` Andrew Morton
2005-11-28 4:59 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-28 5:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-11-28 5:15 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-28 8:31 ` Keith Owens
2005-11-28 12:07 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-28 19:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-04 16:19 ` Alan Cox
2005-12-06 23:38 ` Keith Owens
2005-12-07 2:43 ` Keith Owens
2005-11-28 1:19 ` Keith Owens
2005-11-28 18:58 ` Chandra Seetharaman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20051127220329.GA17786@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=Abhay_Salunke@dell.com \
--cc=Douglas_Warzecha@dell.com \
--cc=achim_leubner@adaptec.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dmp@davidmpye.dyndns.org \
--cc=kaos@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=sekharan@us.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.