[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140228083443.64c92382@notabene.brown>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 08:34:43 +1100
From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux RAID <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
"majianpeng" <majianpeng@...il.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] md / procfs: avoid Oops if md-mod removed while
/proc/mdstat is being polled.
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:58:07 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 17:24:45 +1100 NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de> wrote:
>
> > If poll or select is waiting on /proc/mdstat when md-mod is unloaded
> > an oops will ensure when the poll/select completes.
> >
> > This is because the wait_queue_head which is registered with poll_wait()
> > is local to the module and no longer exists when the poll completes and
> > detaches that wait_queue_head (in poll_free_wait -> remove_wait_queue).
> >
> > To fix this we need the wait_queue_head to have (at least) the same life
> > time as the proc_dir_entry. So this patch places it in that structure.
> >
> > We:
> > - add pde_poll_wait to struct proc_dir_entry
> > - call poll_wait() passing this when poll() is called on the proc file
> > - export a function proc_wake_up which will call wake_up() on pde_poll_wait
> >
> > and make use of all that in md.c
>
> This sounds wrong. If a userspace process is waiting on
> md_event_waiters then the md module is "busy" and the rmmod attempt
> should fail?
Al Viro says "no" quite firmly.
I think the core argument is that
rmmod md-mod < /proc/mdstat
would deadlock.
http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=133024267507384
Thanks,
NeilBrown
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists