Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964991AbVLMPGv (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:06:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964992AbVLMPGv (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:06:51 -0500 Received: from iolanthe.rowland.org ([192.131.102.54]:27855 "HELO iolanthe.rowland.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S964991AbVLMPGu (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:06:50 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:06:48 -0500 (EST) From: Alan Stern X-X-Sender: stern@iolanthe.rowland.org To: Andrew Morton cc: Keith Owens , , , Kernel development list Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7]: Fix for unsafe notifier chain In-Reply-To: <7639.1134450150@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1109 Lines: 27 On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Keith Owens wrote: > On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 14:53:56 -0500 (EST), > Alan Stern wrote: > >The code below defines three new data structures: atomic_notifier_head, > >blocking_notifier_head, and raw_notifier_head. The first two correspond > >to what we had in the earlier patch, and raw_notifier_head is almost the > >same as the current implementation, with no locking or protection at all. > > Acked-By: Keith Owens > > I do not care how this problem is fixed, I am happy with any solution that > > (a) stops notify chains being racy and > (b) allows users of notify_die() to be safely unloaded. Andrew, I've been waiting to hear back about this. Was that latest proposal (three separate types of notifier chains, each with its own API, one of them being completely raw) acceptable? Alan Stern - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/