From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, kay@vrfy.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] sysfs: implement sysfs_remove()
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 12:03:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87six0922b.fsf@tw-ebiederman.twitter.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130919123812.GA4467@mtj.dyndns.org> (Tejun Heo's message of "Thu, 19 Sep 2013 07:38:12 -0500")
I am running from memory right now. But the short version is.
Al Viro has complained about the sysfs removal antics of sysfs, and
I have seen Al get confused and "fix" filesystems that depart too far
from normal filesystem semantics.
I have gone down this path both ways and "rm -rf" semantics are horrible
and cause real bugs in the kernel at the boundaries between devices.
"rm -rf" semantics are also horrible because no sanity checks can be
performed.
Normal "unlink/rmdir" semantics are absolutely achievable including
not allowing children to be removed before their parents with just
a few bug fixes to the kernel. I ran out of energy before I could
track down and make those bug fixes which is why things are left
in the current state. And now we don't need any more boiler plate
to get there, the current primary interfaces to sysfs remember all of
the filenames.
The fact we actually need to allow parents to be deleted before their
children today to support pci is absoltuely broken. It is a simple
matter of code bugs. The device tree semantics are tree semantics not
random order semantics.
I will aim to take a second look when I can spend a little more time
and give you more concrete reasons (other than the old NAK from Viro)
about why recursive sysfs directory removal can cause real bugs. It is
just subtle enough I can't remember the set of the problems in detail
and a quick look at the code is not enough to remind me. But I have run
into real issues with even the limited recursive remvoval that sysfs
does today.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-19 17:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-18 21:15 [PATCHSET] sysfs: implement sysfs_remove() Tejun Heo
2013-09-18 21:15 ` [PATCH 1/4] sysfs: remove sysfs_addrm_cxt->parent_sd Tejun Heo
2013-09-18 21:15 ` [PATCH 2/4] kobject: grab an extra reference on kobject->sd to allow duplicate deletes Tejun Heo
2013-09-18 21:15 ` [PATCH 3/4] sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive Tejun Heo
2013-09-18 21:15 ` [PATCH 4/4] sysfs: introduce [__]sysfs_remove() Tejun Heo
2013-09-19 10:48 ` [PATCHSET] sysfs: implement sysfs_remove() Eric W. Biederman
2013-09-19 12:38 ` Tejun Heo
2013-09-19 17:03 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2013-09-26 23:44 ` Greg KH
2013-09-27 13:49 ` Tejun Heo
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=87six0922b.fsf@tw-ebiederman.twitter.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kay@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@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