[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1473769.SaDXEol2iJ@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 01:10:26 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][tentative] PCI / ACPI: Rework PCI host bridge removal to avoid sysfs warnings
On Wednesday, January 08, 2014 03:41:52 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
>
> >> Not sure how that could happen.
> >>
> >> If it would really happen, we could set dev->match_driver to 0 in pci_stop_dev.
> >
> > Simply, run "modprobe -r driver && modprobe driver" in a loop and
> > remove the PCI host bridge the given device is on in parallel to that. Chances
> > are, you'll see some nice breakage.
>
> I would suggest using match_driver prevent driver from attaching again.
Yes, we can do that. Some locking is needed for it to be non-racy, however.
Anyway, we still have the problem with race conditions between different PCI
removal/rescan code paths. And I'm still going to prepare a patch to use
the remove-rescan mutex to address those race conditions and that patch should
help here too.
>
> ---
> drivers/pci/remove.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/pci/remove.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/pci/remove.c
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/pci/remove.c
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ static void pci_stop_dev(struct pci_dev
> pci_proc_detach_device(dev);
> pci_remove_sysfs_dev_files(dev);
> device_release_driver(&dev->dev);
> + dev->match_driver = false;
> dev->is_added = 0;
> }
>
>
> >
> > Also what happens if somebody uses the "remove" sysfs attribute on a device
> > needed by ioapic/dmar?
>
> Good question, we will have problem in that case.
> To make it simple, we may hide the "remove" in sysfs for ioapic pci device ?
Yeah, we need to do that if using that attribute may lead to problems.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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