Re: [PATCH] EDAC: core EDAC support code

[Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>]

On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 02:41 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 01:53:44PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> >  > > 	rmmod your_turd </sys/spew/from/your_turd
> >  > > and there you go.  rmmod can _NOT_ wait for sysfs references to go away.
> >  > 
> >  > To be fair, the only part of the kernel that supports the above process,
> >  > is the network stack.  And they implemented a special kind of lock to
> >  > handle just this kind of thing.
> >  > 
> >  > That is not something that I want the rest of the kernel to have to use.
> >  > If your code blocks when doing the above thing, that's fine with me.
> > 
> >  One word: fail.  With -EBUSY.
> 
> It seems quite simple to make wait_for_zero_refcount() interruptible? 
> Something like...

Al is correct.

It would have been so simple to implement rmmod as blocking, but it
seems that not what people want.  They want modprobe -r to fail if the
module is busy, without ever causing spurious failures.

Hope that clarifies?
Rusty.
-- 
 ccontrol: http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/ccontrol