Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754278AbYAQEW3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:22:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751471AbYAQEWU (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:22:20 -0500 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:49625 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750991AbYAQEWT (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:22:19 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:22:16 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Tejun Heo Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel , Gabor Gombas , Greg KH , Dave Young , bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.24-rc7 2/2] sysfs: fix bugs in sysfs_rename/move_dir() Message-ID: <20080117042216.GB27894@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <478D74A6.7000206@gmail.com> <478D75BD.1010805@gmail.com> <20080116035224.GW27894@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <478DB0E1.7090401@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <478DB0E1.7090401@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1723 Lines: 40 On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 04:23:13PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > The two posted patches are bug fixes for apparent bugs which can be > triggered by the current two users of the interface. AFAICS, locking > there is weird but correct for the current two users. If you can find > any problem there, please lemme know. How about "what happens after that move-to-NULL if you have a cwd inside the subtree", for starters? > We shouldn't hold this type of > fixes for future clean ups. No, but I'd rather see the rules for callers of sysfs/kobject primitives spelled out - before cleanups or review become even possible. > > As it is, I'm more than inclined > > to propose ripping kobject_move() out, especially since it has only two > > users - something s390-specific and rfcomm, with its shitloads of problems > > beyond just sysfs interaction. > > Can you please elaborate? All sysfs problems discovered by the rfcomm > are fixed by the posted patches. Dave Young has a patch waiting for > verification by the tester. Umm... IIRC, there'd been a lot of fun with tty and procfs sides of that; will check. > Furthermore, even if we rip out > kobject_move() in the future, I don't think -rc7 is the right time to do it. OK... You do have a point, but at this stage I'm not convinced that this thing is safe and usable. I agree that patches do not make things worse, but I suspect that the real problem with kobject_move() is that it's a fundamentally broken interface. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/