From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753605AbbD2HCG (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 29 Apr 2015 03:02:06 -0400
Received: from mail-pd0-f169.google.com ([209.85.192.169]:33081 "EHLO
	mail-pd0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753451AbbD2HCC (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 29 Apr 2015 03:02:02 -0400
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:02:18 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 9/9] zram: add dynamic device add/remove functionality
Message-ID: <20150429070218.GA616@swordfish>
References: <1430140911-7818-1-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <1430140911-7818-10-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20150429001624.GA3917@swordfish>
 <20150429064858.GA5125@blaptop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150429064858.GA5125@blaptop>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hello Minchan,

On (04/29/15 15:48), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > 
> > 	CPU0			CPU1
> > 	umount
> > 	zram_remove()
> > 	zram_reset_device()	disksize_store()
> > 				mount
> > 	kfree zram
> > 
> > or
> > 
> > 	CPU0				CPU1
> > 	umount
> > 	zram_remove()
> > 	zram_reset_device()
> > 					cat /sys/block/zram0/_any_sysfs_node_
> > 	sysfs_remove_group()
> > 	kfree zram			_any_sysfs_node_read()
> > 
> > 
> > and so on. so removing sysfs group before zram_reset_device() makes sense.
> > 
> > at the same time we need to prevent `umount-zram_remove vs. mount' race and forbid
> > zram_remove() on active device. so we check ->bd_openers and perform device reset
> > under ->bd_mutex.
> > 
> 
> Could you explain in detail about unmount-zram_remove vs. mount race?
> I guess it should be done in upper layer(e,g. VFS). Anyway, I want to be
> more clear about that.
> 

sure. I was talking about this one:

	CPU0			CPU1
	umount
	zram_remove()
	lock ->bd_mutex
	zram_reset_device()
	unlock ->bd_mutex
				disksize_store
				mount
				echo 'test' > /mnt/test
	kfree zram
				zram write


w/o ->bd_mutex around zram_reset_device() it's evern simpler, I guess.
hm, I don't think VFS can help us here.

	-ss