From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Potential kobject functionality (two stage delete, single delete)
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 07:40:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CAB38CC.3060001@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101005135750.GA4414@kroah.com>
On 10/05/2010 06:57 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 06:23:19AM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
>> I've been working on reference counting in my own code, and it
>> seemed to me that some of this stuff would be best added to the
>> generic code - I can't be the only one who's needed to solve these
>> particular problems. But kobjects aren't new, maybe someone knows if
>> any of this has been tried before?
>
> Oh yeah, it's come up lots of times before, see the lkml archives :)
Figures :)
>> void kobject_delete(struct kobject *k)
>> {
>> if (!test_and_set_bit(deleted)) {
>> if (delete_fn)
>> delete_fn(k);
>> kobject_put(k);
>> }
>> }
>
> Every time we have tried to do something like this, it ends up not being
> correct, and missused, so we don't.
Well, past experience is hard to argue with. I'd be curious what
previous implementations looked like, hopefully my google-fu is stronger
this time... I just have a hard time seeing a good reason not do it once
correctly, if previous interfaces were prone to misuse it still ought to
be possible to do it right.
>> The more annoying one is two stage delete. Unless my google-fu has
>> failed me, I don't see a reasonable way of using kobject refcounting
>> if you need to drop a refcount from atomic context.
>
> You can't call kfree from atomic context?
Well, kobject_cleanup() does more than kfree() - thus I don't see how
you'd use kobject_put() in atomic context; it seems to me it wouldn't be
entirely unreasonable to replace kobject_put with a kref_put wrapper
specific to your code, then you could queue up the object somewhere and
run kobject_cleanup() yourself - except kobject_cleanup() is static.
So unless I've completely missed something, you have to use
kobject_put() to free a kobject, but kobject_put() can't be called from
atomic context - at least if the kobject was present in sysfs... perhaps
that's where the confusion comes from? Going over the code again it
looks like kobject_cleanup() doesn't do anything but kfree() if the
kobject wasn't in sysfs.
Anyways, in that case the end result is I need my own refcount so when
it goes to 0 I can do the right thing - the kobject's refcount then
serves no purpose, it's just pointless duplication. Am I making any more
sense now?
> Anyway, code does handle this properly, look at the scsi code for
> example, we have a waitqueue-like infrastructure to do this somewhere,
> perhaps it's within the driver core, I can't remember it this early in
> the morning.
I'm not arguing it can't be done, just would like something cleaner than
what I've got now :)
Grepping around for kobject in drivers/scsi and elsewhere isn't getting
me anything, will see where googling gets me...
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Sorry to have to impose upon your time :) Thanks!
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-05 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-05 13:23 [RFC] Potential kobject functionality (two stage delete, single delete) Kent Overstreet
2010-10-05 13:57 ` Greg KH
2010-10-05 14:40 ` Kent Overstreet [this message]
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=4CAB38CC.3060001@gmail.com \
--to=kent.overstreet@gmail.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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