Re: Opinion please
On Monday 16 May 2005 11:21, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
Hello,
Serge pointed out something to me on an internal list here and I wanted to
poll for opinions. Which would you prefer? I think adding another
parameter to audit_send_reply to specify GFP_ATOMIC/KERNEL would be
simplest. But is it wise to do so?
Here's what he had to say:
Hey Tim,
it looks like w_master is now adequately protected by the spinlock.
But I'm not sure whether netlink_unicast is a problem (sure looks like
it - it puts current on a waitqueue for one thing) or what you should do
about it. You might just need to build a list of things to send under
the rcu_read_lock(), then send each element once you rcu_read_unlock().
Ok, I took this advice, and just went ahead and implemented something very
similar. Good idea Serge. Thanks. I'm going to do some more extensive
testing here before I release a patch since people are apparently having
problems with the code (plus I'm going to patch up to rc4-mm2).
-tim