[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0905271736460.2669-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:38:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
cc: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
SCSI development list <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...stanetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/20] sysfs: Only support removing emtpy sysfs directories.
On Wed, 27 May 2009, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> writes:
>
> >
> > As fas as I know, they can't. Instead, they can cause the SCSI layer
> > to unregister a sysfs directory containing a child directory. :-)
> >
> > Basically, a user program can delay removal of the child (i.e., the
> > target) directory indefinitely, because currently the target isn't
> > unregistered when all its children are removed -- it's unregistered
> > when all its children are _released_.
>
> Ok. Is this opens of /dev/sda1 and the like that are being held open by
> userspace that are potentially causing problems?
Yes, plus any other mechanism for preventing a struct device's refcount
from going to 0.
> I think I have the fix to that...
The fix is to delete the target when its children are deleted, and not
wait until the children are released.
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists