From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/20] sysfs: Only support removing emtpy sysfs directories. Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:24:38 -0700 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:43415 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933633AbZE0SYq (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2009 14:24:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Alan Stern's message of "Wed\, 27 May 2009 14\:15\:42 -0400 \(EDT\)") Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: Kay Sievers , James Bottomley , SCSI development list , Andrew Morton , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Kernel development list , Tejun Heo , Cornelia Huck , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" Alan Stern writes: > > As fas as I know, they can't. Instead, they can cause the SCSI layer > to unregister a sysfs directory containing a child directory. :-) > > Basically, a user program can delay removal of the child (i.e., the > target) directory indefinitely, because currently the target isn't > unregistered when all its children are removed -- it's unregistered > when all its children are _released_. Ok. Is this opens of /dev/sda1 and the like that are being held open by userspace that are potentially causing problems? I think I have the fix to that... Eric