From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] msi: free msi_desc entry only after we've released the kobject
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 21:41:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131002204141.GW12758@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131001055346.GA4759@google.com>
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:53:46PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> I think the current kobject delayed release is too aggressive,
I don't agree with that statement, but the rest of the sentence I do:
> in the
> sense that even after we've released all references, the object can
> still be in sysfs, which causes future creates to fail. E.g., this
> fails:
>
> kset = kset_create_and_add("kobj_test", NULL, NULL);
> kset_unregister(kset);
> kset = kset_create_and_add("kobj_test", NULL, NULL); // FAILS
>
> when I think it should succeed. We don't have a way for the caller to
> determine when it's safe to do the second kset_create_and_add().
The reason this happens is that for some reason I can't fathom, the
sysfs cleanup is done when the release function is called, not when
the object is unregistered.
I can see why that's done - it is so that when a kobject is unregistered,
its sysfs entry hangs around until all the children have gone (and hence
its reference count then hits zero.)
> After we release all references, I think it's OK for the kobject
> itself to continue to exist, i.e., we can delay calling t->release().
> But it should be impossible to find a kobject with refcount == 0 via
> sysfs, so we should be able to create a new one with the same name.
>
> In terms of code, I'm suggesting something like the following:
I think I can give you an ack for this - it looks sensible enough, and
should still have the intended debugging behaviour. I haven't tested
it though.
Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Thanks Bjorn.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-02 20:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-26 9:59 [PATCH v2] msi: free msi_desc entry only after we've released the kobject Veaceslav Falico
2013-09-26 14:42 ` Neil Horman
2013-09-28 21:37 ` Veaceslav Falico
2013-10-01 5:53 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-10-02 20:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2013-10-03 20:19 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-10-04 16:46 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-10-09 11:36 ` Veaceslav Falico
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131002204141.GW12758@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=vfalico@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).