[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1905221055190.1410-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 10:56:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>
cc: Jaewon Kim <jaewon31.kim@...il.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jaewon Kim <jaewon31.kim@...sung.com>,
<m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, <ytk.lee@...sung.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] usb: host: xhci: allow __GFP_FS in dma allocation
On Wed, 22 May 2019, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Di, 2019-05-21 at 10:00 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> >
> > Changing configurations amounts to much the same as disconnecting,
> > because both operations destroy all the existing interfaces.
> >
> > Disconnect can arise in two different ways.
> >
> > Physical hot-unplug: All I/O operations will fail.
> >
> > Rmmod or unbind: I/O operations will succeed.
> >
> > The second case is probably okay. The first we can do nothing about.
> > However, in either case we do need to make sure that memory allocations
> > do not require any writebacks. This suggests that we need to call
> > memalloc_noio_save() from within usb_unbind_interface().
>
> I agree with the problem, but I fail to see why this issue would be
> specific to USB. Shouldn't this be done in the device core layer?
Only for drivers that are on the block-device writeback path. The
device core doesn't know which drivers these are.
Alan Stern
Powered by blists - more mailing lists