Re: owner field in `struct fs'

From: Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: Sun Jun 25 2000 - 08:03:19 EDT

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"

Previous message: Derek Martin: "Re: IMMUTABLE and APPEND-ONLY rationales"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Next in thread: Alexander Viro: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Reply: Alexander Viro: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> module constructor. (Well, that's just one of the problems..)
>
> So netdevice methods such as open(), do_ioctl(), set_multicast_list(),
> etc can be and are called when the module refcount is zero.

Just like the block drivers until Al Viro's fix. The same fix makes even
more sense here as open/close are even lower impact. And whoever is calling
driver functions without the driver locked in memory..

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Previous message: Derek Martin: "Re: IMMUTABLE and APPEND-ONLY rationales"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Next in thread: Alexander Viro: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Reply: Alexander Viro: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 25 2000 - 08:12:58 EDT