On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 00:00 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 10:43:36AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 15:22 -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > On 4/25/05, Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > While thinking about locking schema > > > > with respect to sysfs files I recalled, > > > > why I implemented such a logic - > > > > now one can _always_ remove _any_ module > > > > [corresponding object is removed from accessible > > > > pathes and waits untill all exsting users are gone], > > > > which is very good - I really like it in networking model, > > > > while with whole device driver model > > > > if we will read device's file very quickly > > > > in several threads we may end up not unloading it at all. > > > > > > I am sorrry, that is complete bull*. sysfs also allows removing > > > modules at an arbitrary time (and usually without annoying "waiting > > > for refcount" at that)... You just seem to not understand how driver > > > code works, thus the need of inventing your own schema. > > > > Ok, let's try again - now with explanation, > > since it looks like you did not even try to understand what I said. > > If you will remove objects from ->remove() callback > > you may end up with rmmod being stuck. > > Yes, and that is acceptable. networking implemented their own locking > method to allow unloading of their drivers in such a manner. No other > subsystem is going to do that kind of implementation, so Dmitry is > correct here. w1 does it too :) It's locking was lurked in network code. And it _is_ design note to be able to remove objects in any time. Ok, I can not say, that it is exactly like networking, since there is waiting in rmmod path, it is very similar to virtual devices like vlan. > thanks, > > greg k-h -- Evgeniy Polyakov Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
- [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- Prev by Date: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Cogito-0.8 (former git-pasky, big changes!)
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- Previous by thread: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/22] W1: sysfs, lifetime and other fixes
- Index(es):