From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Linux SCSI List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] scsi: don't use execute_in_process_context()
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 10:54:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1292428486.4688.180.camel@mulgrave.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D08E2FF.5090605@kernel.org>
On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 16:47 +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> One way or the other, the current code is racy. The module can go
> away while the work is still running. We'll have to add sync
> interface for ew's, which conceptually is fine but is unnecessary with
> the current code base. Let's do it when it actually is necessary.
OK, ignoring the bickering over API, this is what I don't get.
The executed function releases the parent reference as its last call.
That will cause the freeing of the embedded work item and a cascade
release of all the parents. If there's no more references, that will
result in a final put of the module semaphore and rmmod will then
proceed. What is racy about that? All the work structures and
references have been freed before the module gets removed. Nothing
blocks the execution thread in the function, so it exits long before the
code path gets zeroed.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-15 15:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-19 12:57 [PATCH 1/2] scsi: remove bogus use of struct execute_work in sg Tejun Heo
2010-10-19 12:58 ` [PATCH 2/2] scsi: don't use execute_in_process_context() Tejun Heo
2010-10-22 10:03 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-12-12 22:48 ` James Bottomley
2010-12-14 9:53 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-14 14:09 ` James Bottomley
2010-12-14 14:19 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-14 14:26 ` James Bottomley
2010-12-14 14:33 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-15 3:04 ` James Bottomley
2010-12-15 15:47 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-15 15:54 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2010-12-15 16:00 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-15 17:22 ` James Bottomley
2010-12-15 19:05 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-15 19:10 ` James Bottomley
2010-12-15 19:19 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-15 19:33 ` James Bottomley
2010-12-15 19:42 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-15 19:46 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-16 14:39 ` James Bottomley
2010-12-16 15:51 ` Tejun Heo
2010-12-15 19:34 ` Tejun Heo
2010-10-20 14:29 ` [PATCH 1/2] scsi: remove bogus use of struct execute_work in sg FUJITA Tomonori
2010-10-20 19:56 ` Douglas Gilbert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1292428486.4688.180.camel@mulgrave.site \
--to=james.bottomley@suse.de \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.