[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150126171950.GA9015@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 09:19:50 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: sysfs methods can race with ->remove
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 02:40:31PM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > If a method is registered by the driver, then the driver will
> > unregister it when the ->remove routine runs. I don't know for
> > certain, but I would expect that the sysfs/kernfs core will make sure
> > that any existing method calls complete before unregister returns.
> > This would prevent races.
>
> Yes, attribute deletions are blocked till the on-going sysfs
> read/write operations are finished and further rw accesses are failed.
Btw, where do we do that? I did a walk through the code starting
from device_del, but must have missed the obvious.
> > The sriov_numvfs_store method does have the same problem, and so does
> > the reset_store method (by way of pci_reset_function ->
> > pci_dev_save_and_disable -> pci_reset_notify).
> >
> > Tejun, is my analysis correct? How should we fix these races?
>
> I'm not really following what the actual problem case is, so SCSI
> subsystem store methods are derefing dev->driver without synchronizing
> against detach events? If that's the case, the solution would be
> synchronizing against attach/detach events? Sorry if I'm being
> totally idiotic. I'm having a bit of hard time jumping right in. :)
No problem. That's the basic situation we are talking about. I have
a serie fixing some long standing issues in the device model integration
in SCSI, and pointed out a possible issue in that area.
So what is the proper lock to take to prevent ->remove from beeing
called while in such a method? A mentioned about I tried to peel
through all the layers of the onion^H^H^H^H^Hdriver core, but so far
couldn't find anything obvious.
--
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