From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756105AbYDAImj (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 04:42:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752448AbYDAImc (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 04:42:32 -0400 Received: from 81-174-11-161.static.ngi.it ([81.174.11.161]:38243 "EHLO mail.enneenne.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752610AbYDAImb (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 04:42:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 10:42:14 +0200 From: Rodolfo Giometti To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, davej@redhat.com, sam@ravnborg.org, greg@kroah.com, randy.dunlap@oracle.com Message-ID: <20080401084214.GY7279@enneenne.com> References: <12048053463198-git-send-email-giometti@linux.it> <12048053473401-git-send-email-giometti@linux.it> <20080320130356.69ab65fe.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080325144400.GG8959@enneenne.com> <20080327202531.a924e5d9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080327202531.a924e5d9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Organization: GNU/Linux Device Drivers, Embedded Systems and Courses X-PGP-Key: gpg --keyserver keyserver.linux.it --recv-keys D25A5633 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.168.32.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: giometti@enneenne.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] LinuxPPS core support. X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:23:22 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail.enneenne.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 08:25:31PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:44:00 +0100 Rodolfo Giometti wrote: > > > > > > As it stands, there might be deadlocks such as when a process which itself > > > holds a ref on the pps_device (with an open fd?) calls > > > pps_unregister_source. > > > > I can add a wait_event_interruptible in order to allow userland to > > continue by receiving a signal. It could be acceptable? > > There should be no need to "wait" for anything. When the final reference > to an object is released, that object is cleaned up. Just like we do for > inodes, dentries, pages, files, and 100 other kernel objects. > > The need to wait for something else to go away is a big red flag with > "busted refcounting" written on it. > > > > Also, we need to take care that all processes which were waiting in > > > pps_unregister_source() get to finish their cleanup before we permit rmmod > > > to proceed. Is that handled somewhere? > > > > I don't understand the problem... this code as been added in order to > > avoid the case where a pps_event() is called while a process executes > > the pps_unregister_source(). If more processes try to execute this > > code the first which enters will execute idr_remove() which prevents > > another process to reach the wait_event()... is that wrong? =:-o > > I was asking you! > > We should get the reference counting and object lifetimes sorted out first. > There should be no "wait for to be released" code. Once that is > in place, things like rmmod will also sort themselves out: it just won't be > possible to remove the module while there are live references to objects. The problem is related to serial and parallel clients. The PPS source related to a serial port (or a parallel one) uses the serial (or parallel) IRQ to get PPS timestamps and it could be possible that a process tries to close the PPS source while another CPU is runnig the serial IRQ, so I cannot remove the PPS object until the IRQ handler is finished its job on the PPS object. For clients (currently none :) which define their own IRQ handler for PPS timestamps managing the problem doesn't arise at all. Ciao, Rodolfo -- GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: giometti@enneenne.com Linux Device Driver giometti@gnudd.com Embedded Systems giometti@linux.it UNIX programming phone: +39 349 2432127