Re: [PATCH 1/4] module: implement module_inhibit_unload()

[Tejun Heo]

Rusty Russell wrote:
> As stated you cannot protect arbitrary code this way, as you are trying
> to do.  I do not think you've broken any of the current code, but I
> cannot tell.  You're certainly going to surprise unsuspecting future
> authors.

Can you elaborate a bit?  Why can't it protect the code?

> Can you really not figure out the module owner of the sysfs entry to inc
> its use count during this procedure?  (__module_get()).

I can but I don't think it's worth the effort.  It will involve passing
@owner parameter down through kobject to sysfs but the path is pretty
obscure and thus difficult to test.  I think it's too much work for the
users of the API and it will be easy to pass the wrong @owner and go
unnoticed.

Thanks.

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