Re: Top 10 kernel oopses for the week ending January 5th, 2008

[Neil Brown]

On Thursday January 10, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 03:13:48PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
> > > What guarantees that it doesn't happen before we get to callback?  AFAICS,
> > > nothing whatsoever...
> > 
> > Yes, that's bad isn't it :-)
> > 
> > I think I should be using sysfs_schedule_callback here.  That makes the 
> > required 'get' and 'put' calls.... but it can fail with -ENOMEM.  I
> > wonder what I do if -ENOMEM???  Maybe I'll just continue to roll my
> > one :-( 
> 
> How about this instead (completely untested)
> 
> 	* split failure exits
> 	* switch to kick_rdev_from_array()
> 	* fold unbind_rdev_from_array() into it (no other callers anymore)
> 	* take export_rdev() into failure case in bind_rdev_to_array()
> 	* in kick_rdev_from_array() do what export_rdev() does sans
> kobject_put() and do that before schedule_work().  Take kobject_put() into
> delayed_delete().

While there are probably some good ideas in there, I think fixing this
particular bug is much simpler.  Just take a reference to the object
before scheduling the worker, and drop it when the worker has done
its work.

I have a closer look at the idea of no required export_rdev after a
failed bind_rdev_to_array.  On the surface it does seem to make the
code nicer.

Thanks,
NeilBrown
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/