Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Add post_release() operation

[Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>]

On 9/11/26 3:34 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2026/09/12 4:54, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 9/9/26 3:48 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>>>        int (*alternative_gpt_sector)(struct gendisk *disk, sector_t *sector);
>>> +    /*
>>> +     * Called after disk->open_mutex is released in the bdev_release() path.
>>> +     * Used by loop devices that need to perform synchronization without
>>> +     * holding disk->open_mutex. This operation has to be idempotent.
>>> +     */
>>> +    void (*post_release)(struct gendisk *disk);
>>
>> Instead of referring to bdev_release(), which is not in the public API,
>> the above comment should mention that .post_release() is called after .release().
> 
> Such change is not accurate. The .release() is also called if something went wrong after
> the .open() succeeded. The reason I emphasis bdev_release() is that the .post_release()
> is not called if something went wrong after the .open() succeeded.

Please integrate the above text in the comment above .post_release().

>> The above comment should also mention that .post_release()
>> implementations may sleep.
> 
> Such change is fine.
> 
>>
>> Additionally, why is .post_release() added at the end instead of just
>> under .release()?
> 
> Because I consider the .post_release() is categorized to
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * Special callback for probing GPT entry at a given sector.
> 	 * Needed by Android devices, used by GPT scanner and MMC blk
> 	 * driver.
> 	 */
> 	int (*alternative_gpt_sector)(struct gendisk *disk, sector_t *sector);
> 
> hook.

Are you claiming that .post_release() is Android-specific? I don't think
that's correct.

Bart.