From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 12:34:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 12:34:30 -0400 Received: from mailout09.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.84]:11670 "EHLO mailout09.sul.t-online.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 12:34:29 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 18:34:09 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Alan Cox Cc: Andi Kleen , "David S. Miller" , torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paul.mckenney@us.ibm.com, andrea@suse.de Subject: Re: 8-CPU (SMP) #s for lockfree rtcache Message-ID: <20020528183409.A23001@averell> In-Reply-To: <20020528171104.D19734@in.ibm.com> <20020528.042514.92633856.davem@redhat.com> <20020528182806.A21303@in.ibm.com> <20020528.054043.06045639.davem@redhat.com> <1022605393.9255.116.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 07:03:13PM +0200, Alan Cox wrote: > On Tue, 2002-05-28 at 16:45, Andi Kleen wrote: > > The next obvious benefitor IMHO is module unloading. Just putting > > a synchronize_kernel() somewhere at the end of sys_delete_modules() > > after the destructor makes module unloading much less nasty than it > > used to be (yes it doesn't fix all possible module unload races, but a > > large share of them and it makes the problem much more controllable) > > For 2.5 it would be much more productive to make sys_delete_module > memset the entire vmalloced space of the module to an illegal > instruction before returning And gain tons of new atomic_incs and decs everywhere in the process? I would prefer RCU. -Andi