On Thu, 20 Apr 2000, Borislav Deianov wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 07:12:03PM +0100, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Apr 2000, Borislav Deianov wrote:
> > > Modifying sys_call_table from a module works fine but is architecture
> > > specific (I'm told) and gets intersting when two modules try to
> > > intercept the same system call.
> >
> > this interesting part can be resolved rather straightforward by providing
> > an (exported) read-write spinlock that is taken for read on each system
> > call and write by those wishing to modify sys_call_table[]. (this is not
> > nice because of the effort of taking even a read spinlock on each syscall)
>
> Yup, I forgot about that. I was actually thinking about rmmod - a
> module cannot be safely removed if another one intercepted the same
> syscall after it (as explained in the Linux Kernel Module Programming
> Guide). The funny thing is TSRs under DOS had exactly the same problem
> with interrupts :)
oops, I just realized that I shouldn't have said above or put a smiley in
front of it :)
Ok, since you fell for it - let's at least make a useful excercise out of
it - find why my "suggestion" is totally broken...
Regards,
Tigran.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 23 2000 - 21:00:17 EST