On 06/25, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Monday, 25 June 2007 12:43, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > Second, call_usermodehelper's path should first increment the counter, and only
> > then check usermodehelper_disabled,
>
> It does this already.
Ah, sorry, I looked at this patch without seeing the underlying code.
BTW, isn't it better to rename new_helper/helper_finished to
helper_lock/helper_unlock ?
> If I understand that correctly, it should suffice to place smp_mb() after
> usermodehelper_disabled = 1; in usermodehelper_pm_callback() and another
> smp_mb() after atomic_inc(&running_helpers); in new_helper().
>
> Is that correct?
Afaics, yes.
Oleg.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
