Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 7 Apr 2021 15:17:46 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, keescook@chromium.org,
        dhowells@redhat.com, hch@infradead.org, mbenes@suse.com,
        ngupta@vflare.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com,
        axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] zram: fix crashes due to use of cpu hotplug
 multistate
Message-ID: <20210407201746.ueijmegmpbyq5quv@treble>
References: <20210310212128.GR4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
 <YErOkGrvtQODXtB0@google.com>
 <20210312183238.GW4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
 <YEvA1dzDsFOuKdZ/@google.com>
 <20210319190924.GK4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
 <YFjHvUolScp3btJ9@google.com>
 <20210322204156.GM4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
 <YFkWMZ0m9nKCT69T@google.com>
 <20210401235925.GR4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
 <YGbNpLKXfWpy0ZZa@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YGbNpLKXfWpy0ZZa@kroah.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 09:54:12AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:59:25PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > As for the syfs deadlock possible with drivers, this fixes it in a generic way:
> > 
> > commit fac43d8025727a74f80a183cc5eb74ed902a5d14
> > Author: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> > Date:   Sat Mar 27 14:58:15 2021 +0000
> > 
> >     sysfs: add optional module_owner to attribute
> >     
> >     This is needed as otherwise the owner of the attribute
> >     or group read/store might have a shared lock used on driver removal,
> >     and deadlock if we race with driver removal.
> >     
> >     Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> 
> No, please no.  Module removal is a "best effort", if the system dies
> when it happens, that's on you.  I am not willing to expend extra energy
> and maintance of core things like sysfs for stuff like this that does
> not matter in any system other than a developer's box.

So I mentioned this on IRC, and some folks were surprised to hear that
module unloading is unsupported and is just a development aid.

Is this stance documented anywhere?

If we really believe this to be true, we should make rmmod taint the
kernel.

-- 
Josh