Re: [PATCH 1/2] module: make locking more fine-grained.

[Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>]

On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 03:08:42 pm Américo Wang wrote:
> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 09:31:42PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> >@@ -783,9 +787,13 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(delete_module, const cha
> > 	/* Store the name of the last unloaded module for diagnostic purposes */
> > 	strlcpy(last_unloaded_module, mod->name, sizeof(last_unloaded_module));
> > 	ddebug_remove_module(mod->name);
> >+
> >+	/* free_module doesn't want module_mutex held by caller. */
> >+	mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> > 	free_module(mod);
> >-
> >- out:
> >+	goto out_stop;
> 
> As Stephen found in linux-next, this line doesn't pass compiling.
> I think this line should be just deleted.

Yep, I didn't commit my fixes to the backport before pushing & posting;
I've done that now.  You can get the usable one from the git tree:

        git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rusty/linux-2.6 modules

Thanks,
Rusty.