Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 10:33:44 -0800
From: Jessica Yu <jeyu@redhat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        rusty@rustcorp.com.au
Subject: Re: module: When modifying a module's text ignore modules which are
 going away too
Message-ID: <20161123183344.ltp6w3wps4feei7g@jeyu>
References: <20161026080914.5bc68d0d@gandalf.local.home>
 <1477560966-781-1-git-send-email-atomlin@redhat.com>
 <20161027094934.296d668d@gandalf.local.home>
 <20161107114629.GB16093@atomlin.usersys.redhat.com>
 <20161109104058.GB27196@packer-debian-8-amd64.digitalocean.com>
 <20161123110049.1c458298@gandalf.local.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161123110049.1c458298@gandalf.local.home>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20161014 (1.7.1)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1035
Lines: 34

+++ Steven Rostedt [23/11/16 11:00 -0500]:
>On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 05:40:58 -0500
>Jessica Yu <jeyu@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> +++ Aaron Tomlin [07/11/16 11:46 +0000]:
>> >Hi Jessica,
>> >
>> >Any thoughts?
>>
>> Hi Aaron,
>>
>> Thanks for your patience as I slowly work through a large swath of emails :-)
>>
>> Anyway, this looks fine to me. A going module's text should be (or
>> soon will be) rw anyway, so checking for going modules in the ro
>> case should be enough.
>>
>> Rusty, if you give your ack for the second patch, I can apply both
>> patches to my modules-next branch. I'll also incorporate Steven's
>> suggestion for a comment explaining why going modules shouldn't be
>> converted to ro in this context.
>>
>
>Hi Jessica,
>
>Have you pulled these in? I haven't noticed them in linux-next.

I currently have this queued up for 4.10. I'm still clearing up some
(unrelated to this patch) maintainership transition questions, but
expect the new modules tree to be pushed out and included in -next
by this week.

Thanks,
Jessica