From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman)
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 00:07:12 -0600
> This patch is minimal stupid and should just work. Doubtless the
> clever patch can be applied on top, once the details are figured
> out.
That is true and that's why I applied your patch.
Thanks!
-
To unsubscri
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Applied, thanks Eric.
>
> Although juding by his comments I though that Denis had different
> plans in mind to fix this.
He might. Somehow I wasn't on that thread so I missed it until after
I sent this patch. Reading through that thread again it look
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman)
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:45:33 -0600
>
> It is not safe to to place struct pernet_operations in a special section.
> We need struct pernet_operations to last until we call
> unregister_pernet_subsys.
> Which doesn't happen until module unload.
>
> So
It is not safe to to place struct pernet_operations in a special section.
We need struct pernet_operations to last until we call unregister_pernet_subsys.
Which doesn't happen until module unload.
So marking struct pernet_operations is a disaster for modules in two ways.
- We discard it before we
