Message-ID: <4F2969B7.4040202@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 20:35:03 +0400
From: Dmitry Antipov <dmitry.antipov@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120129 Thunderbird/10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Module/kthread/printk question/problem
References: <4F2963AA.3010306@linaro.org> <1328113899.1882.2.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC>
In-Reply-To: <1328113899.1882.2.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 670
Lines: 22

On 02/01/2012 08:31 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> Race is here :
>
> Here you allow testmod_exit() to continue, while _this_ thread has not
> yet exited.
>
> And if this thread is preempted a litle bit, its code already was freed.
> ->  crash.

I realize this, but there was a second part of the question: what's the
better way to ensure that all test/X threads are really gone at some point of
testmod_exit()?

Thanks,
Dmitry

--
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/