From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:42616 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758544Ab1FVTbT (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:31:19 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:31:18 +0100 From: Al Viro To: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [nfs, rpc] crap with refcounting and rmmod races Message-ID: <20110622193118.GE11521@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20110622191239.GD11521@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20110622191239.GD11521@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 08:12:40PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > Note that extra references to vfsmount do not prevent umount from > removing the sucker from the tree and dropping the preexisting reference > to it. umount -l will do that just fine. > > This thing is called as ->rpc_release(); do we have anything > protecting the issuer of rpc_run_task() from being rmmod'ed before (or > during) the call of ->rpc_release()? While we are at it, is ->rpc_release() allowed to trigger rpc_shutdown_client() on out ->tk_client? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [nfs, rpc] crap with refcounting and rmmod races Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:31:18 +0100 Message-ID: <20110622193118.GE11521@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20110622191239.GD11521@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Linus Torvalds To: linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110622191239.GD11521-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 08:12:40PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > Note that extra references to vfsmount do not prevent umount from > removing the sucker from the tree and dropping the preexisting reference > to it. umount -l will do that just fine. > > This thing is called as ->rpc_release(); do we have anything > protecting the issuer of rpc_run_task() from being rmmod'ed before (or > during) the call of ->rpc_release()? While we are at it, is ->rpc_release() allowed to trigger rpc_shutdown_client() on out ->tk_client? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html