From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] module: add per-module params lock
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 10:12:36 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mw0ft283.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1433422379-24418-1-git-send-email-ddstreet@ieee.org>
Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org> writes:
> I sent this as part of a patch series a few days ago, which I was asked to
> break up, so I'm sending only this patch as a RFC now, until I work out
> the details of the zswap patch that needs this. I'd like to get comments
> on this early, since it changes the way module param locking is done.
OK, it's not insane, but I'm not entirely convinced.
1) The difference between blocking sysfs for read vs write is mainly
documentation. In theory, it allows a rwsem, though in practice it's
not been a bottleneck to now.
2) Implicit is bad: implying the module rather than the parameter is
weird, and skips the BUG_ON() check which was there before.
And finally, why are you loading a module from a param callback? That's
a first!
Thanks,
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-05 2:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-04 12:52 [RFC] module: add per-module params lock Dan Streetman
2015-06-05 0:42 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2015-06-05 10:47 ` Dan Streetman
2015-06-08 21:13 ` Rusty Russell
2015-06-10 1:01 ` Dan Streetman
2015-06-10 17:44 ` [PATCH] module: make perm const, change BUG_ON to BUILD_BUG_ON Dan Streetman
2015-06-12 1:43 ` Rusty Russell
2015-06-12 3:23 ` Dan Streetman
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=87mw0ft283.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.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