[PATCH 06/11] block: fix queue freeze vs limits lock order in sysfs store methods
Christoph Hellwig
hch at lst.de
Fri Jan 10 01:33:11 PST 2025
On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 01:07:47PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> Do you mean that the sysfs_lock could be removed in future? I would have
> thought that queue limits lock could be used for the same thing, but I am
> probably failing to see some lock nesting/ordering issues...
More or less. Think about it: what does it even try to protect?
Readіng/writing sysfs files vs itself and file removal it serialized by
sysfs/kernfs internally.
Any information tweaked in sysfs usually also has other places that can
modify it. So we'll need a lock independent of sysfs for that anyway.
A big part, buy by far all of that is covered by limits_lock.
Serializing creating/removing sysfs attribues is supposed to be
serialized using sysfs_dir_lock, although that needs a careful audit.
It's also used to serialize a few debugfs things, but we'll need to look
carefully for what exactly and switch that over to debugfs_mutex or
something new.
And then there's a bunch of misc cruft that also needs a careful look.
More information about the Linux-nvme
mailing list