2023-08-11 02:30:48

by Daniel Golle

Subject: [PATCH v4 3/8] mtd: ubi: block: don't return on error when removing

There is no point on returning the error from ubiblock_remove in case
it is being called due to a volume removal event -- the volume is gone,
we should destroy and remove the ubiblock device no matter what.

Introduce new boolean parameter 'force' to tell ubiblock_remove to go
on even in case the ubiblock device is still busy. Use that new option
when calling ubiblock_remove due to a UBI_VOLUME_REMOVED event.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle <[email protected]>
---
drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c | 6 +++---
drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c | 2 +-
drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
index 437c5b83ffe51..69fa6fecb8494 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
@@ -456,7 +456,7 @@ static void ubiblock_cleanup(struct ubiblock *dev)
idr_remove(&ubiblock_minor_idr, dev->gd->first_minor);
}

-int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi)
+int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi, bool force)
{
struct ubiblock *dev;
int ret;
@@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi)

/* Found a device, let's lock it so we can check if it's busy */
mutex_lock(&dev->dev_mutex);
- if (dev->refcnt > 0) {
+ if (dev->refcnt > 0 && !force) {
ret = -EBUSY;
goto out_unlock_dev;
}
@@ -545,7 +545,7 @@ static int ubiblock_notify(struct notifier_block *nb,
*/
break;
case UBI_VOLUME_REMOVED:
- ubiblock_remove(&nt->vi);
+ ubiblock_remove(&nt->vi, true);
break;
case UBI_VOLUME_RESIZED:
ubiblock_resize(&nt->vi);
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c
index f43430b9c1e65..bb55e863dd296 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c
@@ -572,7 +572,7 @@ static long vol_cdev_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
struct ubi_volume_info vi;

ubi_get_volume_info(desc, &vi);
- err = ubiblock_remove(&vi);
+ err = ubiblock_remove(&vi, false);
break;
}

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h b/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h
index c8f1bd4fa1008..44c0eeaf1e1b0 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h
+++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h
@@ -979,7 +979,7 @@ static inline void ubi_fastmap_destroy_checkmap(struct ubi_volume *vol) {}
int ubiblock_init(void);
void ubiblock_exit(void);
int ubiblock_create(struct ubi_volume_info *vi);
-int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi);
+int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi, bool force);
#else
static inline int ubiblock_init(void) { return 0; }
static inline void ubiblock_exit(void) {}
@@ -987,7 +987,7 @@ static inline int ubiblock_create(struct ubi_volume_info *vi)
{
return -ENOSYS;
}
-static inline int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi)
+static inline int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi, bool force)
{
return -ENOSYS;
}
--
2.41.0

2023-10-03 18:14:54

by Richard Weinberger

Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/8] mtd: ubi: block: don't return on error when removing

----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "Daniel Golle" <[email protected]>
> An: "Randy Dunlap" <[email protected]>, "Miquel Raynal" <[email protected]>, "richard" <[email protected]>,
> "Vignesh Raghavendra" <[email protected]>, "Rob Herring" <[email protected]>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski"
> <[email protected]>, "Conor Dooley" <[email protected]>, "Daniel Golle" <[email protected]>,
> "linux-mtd" <[email protected]>, "devicetree" <[email protected]>, "linux-kernel"
> <[email protected]>
> Gesendet: Freitag, 11. August 2023 03:37:12
> Betreff: [PATCH v4 3/8] mtd: ubi: block: don't return on error when removing

> There is no point on returning the error from ubiblock_remove in case
> it is being called due to a volume removal event -- the volume is gone,
> we should destroy and remove the ubiblock device no matter what.
>
> Introduce new boolean parameter 'force' to tell ubiblock_remove to go
> on even in case the ubiblock device is still busy. Use that new option
> when calling ubiblock_remove due to a UBI_VOLUME_REMOVED event.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c | 6 +++---
> drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c | 2 +-
> drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h | 4 ++--
> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
> index 437c5b83ffe51..69fa6fecb8494 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
> @@ -456,7 +456,7 @@ static void ubiblock_cleanup(struct ubiblock *dev)
> idr_remove(&ubiblock_minor_idr, dev->gd->first_minor);
> }
>
> -int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi)
> +int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi, bool force)
> {
> struct ubiblock *dev;
> int ret;
> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi)
>
> /* Found a device, let's lock it so we can check if it's busy */
> mutex_lock(&dev->dev_mutex);
> - if (dev->refcnt > 0) {
> + if (dev->refcnt > 0 && !force) {
> ret = -EBUSY;
> goto out_unlock_dev;

Is it really safe to destroy the blk queue (via ubiblock_cleanup()) if refcnt is > 0?

Thanks,
//richard