From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Damien Riegel <damien.riegel@savoirfairelinux.com>,
linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>,
Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] watchdog: Separate and maintain variables based on variable lifetime
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 17:10:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5678A322.2010109@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151221172815.GC12696@localhost>
On 12/21/2015 09:28 AM, Damien Riegel wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 01:05:00PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> All variables required by the watchdog core to manage a watchdog are
>> currently stored in struct watchdog_device. The lifetime of those
>> variables is determined by the watchdog driver. However, the lifetime
>> of variables used by the watchdog core differs from the lifetime of
>> struct watchdog_device. To remedy this situation, watchdog drivers
>> can implement ref and unref callbacks, to be used by the watchdog
>> core to lock struct watchdog_device in memory.
>>
>> While this solves the immediate problem, it depends on watchdog drivers
>> to actually implement the ref/unref callbacks. This is error prone,
>> often not implemented in the first place, or not implemented correctly.
>>
>> To solve the problem without requiring driver support, split the variables
>> in struct watchdog_device into two data structures - one for variables
>> associated with the watchdog driver, one for variables associated with
>> the watchdog core. With this approach, the watchdog core can keep track
>> of its variable lifetime and no longer depends on ref/unref callbacks
>> in the driver. As a side effect, some of the variables originally in
>> struct watchdog_driver are now private to the watchdog core and no longer
>> visible in watchdog drivers.
>>
>> The 'ref' and 'unref' callbacks in struct watchdog_driver are no longer
>> used and marked as deprecated.
>
> Two comments below. It's great to see that unbinding a driver no longer
> triggers a kernel panic.
>
It should not have caused a panic to start with, but the ref/unref functions
for the most part were either not or wrongly implemented. Not really
surprising - it took me a while to understand the problem.
[ ... ]
>>
>> /*
>> + * struct _watchdog_device - watchdog core internal data
>
> Think it should be /**. Anyway, I find it confusing to have both
> _watchdog_device and watchdog_device, but I can't think of a better
> name right now.
I renamed the data structure to watchdog_data and moved it into watchdog_dev.c
since it is only used there. No '**', though, because it is not a published
API, but just an internal data structure.
I also renamed the matching variable name to 'wd_data' (from '_wdd').
>>
>> static void watchdog_cdev_unregister(struct watchdog_device *wdd)
>> {
>> - mutex_lock(&wdd->lock);
>> - set_bit(WDOG_UNREGISTERED, &wdd->status);
>> - mutex_unlock(&wdd->lock);
>> + struct _watchdog_device *_wdd = wdd->wdd_data;
>>
>> - cdev_del(&wdd->cdev);
>> + cdev_del(&_wdd->cdev);
>> if (wdd->id == 0) {
>> misc_deregister(&watchdog_miscdev);
>> - old_wdd = NULL;
>> + _old_wdd = NULL;
>> }
>> +
>> + if (watchdog_active(wdd))
>> + pr_crit("watchdog%d: watchdog still running!\n", wdd->id);
>
> As it is now safe to unbind and rebind a driver, it means that a
> watchdog driver probe function can now be called with a running
> watchdog. Some drivers handle this situation, but I think that most of
> them expect the watchdog to be off at this point.
>
No semantics change, though, and no change in behavior. Drivers _should_
handle that situation today. Sure, many don't, but that is a different issue.
I'll address handling an already-running watchdog by the watchdog core until
the character device is opened in a separate patch set, but we'll have to have
this series accepted before I re-introduce that. Even with that, it will still
be the driver's responsibility to detect and report that/if a watchdog is
already running.
Thanks,
Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-22 1:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-20 21:04 [PATCH 0/5] watchdog: Replace driver based refcounting Guenter Roeck
2015-12-20 21:04 ` [PATCH 1/5] watchdog: Create watchdog device in watchdog_dev.c Guenter Roeck
2015-12-21 17:31 ` Damien Riegel
2015-12-21 23:28 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-12-22 15:33 ` Damien Riegel
2015-12-22 16:15 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-12-20 21:05 ` [PATCH 2/5] watchdog: Separate and maintain variables based on variable lifetime Guenter Roeck
2015-12-21 17:28 ` Damien Riegel
2015-12-21 23:36 ` Tomas Winkler
2015-12-22 1:40 ` Guenter Roeck
[not found] ` <CA+i0qc6O9BJaJd-RrZhoTRUkkCohTjZxVccS=NC6JEUKYwvGPQ@mail.gmail.com>
2015-12-23 0:32 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-12-22 1:10 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2015-12-22 16:09 ` Damien Riegel
2015-12-22 16:22 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-12-22 19:28 ` Damien Riegel
2015-12-22 19:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2015-12-20 21:05 ` [PATCH 3/5] watchdog: da9052_wdt: Drop reference counting Guenter Roeck
2015-12-20 21:05 ` [PATCH 4/5] watchdog: da9055_wdt: " Guenter Roeck
2015-12-20 21:05 ` [PATCH 5/5] hwmon: (sch56xx) Drop watchdog driver data reference count callbacks Guenter Roeck
2015-12-21 10:37 ` Hans de Goede
2015-12-21 13:21 ` Guenter Roeck
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=5678A322.2010109@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=damien.riegel@savoirfairelinux.com \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=panand@redhat.com \
--cc=wim@iguana.be \
/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