Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 15:46:47 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] protect remove_proc_entry
Message-Id: <20051230154647.5a38227e.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <1135978110.6039.81.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1135973075.6039.63.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<1135978110.6039.81.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 636
Lines: 16

Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(remove_proc_lock);
>

I'll take a closer look at this next week.

The official way of protecting the contents of a directory from concurrent
lookup or modification is to take its i_sem.  But procfs is totally weird
and that approach may well not be practical here.  We'd certainly prefer
not to rely upon lock_kernel().
-
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/