On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Alan Stern wrote:
> >> The unloading can proceed once module_unload_inhibit_cnt reaches zero.
> >> An unloading thread only has to care about inhibition put in effect
> >> before unloading has started, so there's no need to check again.
> >
> > You haven't fully answered Jon's question. Suppose
> > module_unload_inhibit_cnt is nonzero, so the task adds itself to the
> > module_unload_wait queue, changes to TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, and calls
> > schedule. There's nothing to prevent somebody else from waking the
> > task back up before the original inhibition has been lifted.
>
> Hmmm... I might be missing something here. Who else can wake up a
> thread in uninterruptible sleep?
In principle, anything can. There has never been any guarantee in the
kernel that a task sleeping on a waitqueue will remain asleep until
the waitqueue is signalled. That's part of the reason why things like
__wait_event() are coded as loops.
Alan Stern
-
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]
