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:   Tue, 19 Oct 2021 18:25:18 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc:     Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, tj@kernel.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, minchan@kernel.org, jeyu@kernel.org,
        shuah@kernel.org, bvanassche@acm.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
        joe@perches.com, tglx@linutronix.de, keescook@chromium.org,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 11/12] zram: fix crashes with cpu hotplug multistate
Message-ID: <YW7xbnrqfzifa9OC@kroah.com>
References: <YWeR4moCRh+ZHOmH@T590>
 <YWiSAN6xfYcUDJCb@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <YWjCpLUNPF3s4P2U@T590>
 <YWjJ0O7K+31Iz3ox@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <YWk9e957Hb+I7HvR@T590>
 <YWm68xUnAofop3PZ@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <YWq3Z++uoJ/kcp+3@T590>
 <YW3LuzaPhW96jSBK@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <YW4uwep3BCe9Vxq8@T590>
 <YW7pQKi8AlV+ZemU@bombadil.infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YW7pQKi8AlV+ZemU@bombadil.infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 08:50:24AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> So do you want to take the position:
> 
> Hey driver authors: you cannot use any shared lock on module removal and
> on sysfs ops?

Yes, I would not recommend using such a lock at all.  sysfs operations
happen on a per-device basis, so you can lock the device structure.
Module removal happens on a driver basis, and I have no idea what you
want to lock there, but odds are it is NOT shared with your per-device
structures either, right?

If so, then yes, that is a bug, but a very rare one as drivers should do
almost nothing except register/unregister_driver() in their module
init/exit calls.

zram is not a "normal" driver at all here, so fixing this type of
problem up should be done in the zram code, it is not a generic
module/sysfs issue at all.

thanks,

greg k-h