Re: [RFC] new module format

[Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>]

On Thursday 18 July 2002 14:02, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> 
> > To add a new user, the active bit has to be set, as shown in this skeleton,
> > which is pretty much the existing try_inc_mod_count scheme:
> >
> >        spin_lock(&some_spinlock);
> >        if (<mod_active_bit>)
> >                <inc_mod_user_count>
> >        spin_unlock(&some_spinlock);
> >
> >        if <users>, do the mount
> >
> > In other words, the module has some state, the transitions of which are
> > protected by a spinlock.
> 
> This means you still need another lock to protect the data structures and
> you still have module pointers everywhere.

A module pointer per filesystem does not count as 'everywhere'.

> I want to get rid of that
> "same_spinlock" (aka unload_lock), because it's not needed.
> I suggest we continue this discussion when I post the new patches in a few
> days, then it should become more clear.

Sure.

-- 
Daniel