On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 11:57:28AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > This patch (as1013) was suggested by David Woodhouse; it fixes a race > > in the driver core. If a device is unregistered at the same time as > > its driver is unloaded, the driver's code pages may be unmapped while > > the remove method is still running. The calls to get_driver() and > > put_driver() were intended to prevent this, but they don't work if the > > driver's module count has already dropped to 0. > > > > Instead, the patch keeps the device on the driver's list until after > > the remove method has returned. This forces the necessary > > synchronization to occur. > > Is this something that you all feel is worth getting in for 2.6.24? > Does it fix a regression that just showed up, or is just a bugfix for > something that people finally realized has always been there? > > Can it wait for 2.6.25 to get some more testing in -mm?
Considering how few people have been affected by it, I'm willing to let it wait for 2.6.25. David Woodhouse may feel differently. Alan Stern - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
