From: Jamie Lokier <lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>,
Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.name>,
Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>,
kaos@ocs.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Raceless module interface
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 03:09:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020912030933.A13608@kushida.apsleyroad.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020912014331.961472C12A@lists.samba.org>; from rusty@rustcorp.com.au on Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 11:42:45AM +1000
Rusty Russell wrote:
> Ah, yes, four-point module interface: init, start, stop, destroy.
> Then you can call stop, realize the module is not at zero refcnt (you
> lost a race), then call start again. Similar thing if someone
> requests a stopped module.
That's one fairly complicated way of going about it.
Simpler is three points: init, stop, destroy. Stop is that part before
you call synchronise_kernel() - it's not something you can turn back
from.
If somebody needs the module, and it currently inside its
cleanup_module() function, they simply wait until destroy finishes, and
the module is unloaded, and then _reload_ the module from scratch. So,
let the disk I/O happen. This is a rare.
> Now you're going to have to change request_module() so the kernel can
> realize that you're requesting a module which already exists
> (request_module()'s effect currently depends on /etc/modules.conf of
> course).
Not at all. Keep request_module() simple, and change module loading,
like this:
1. Just before a module's cleanup_module() function is called, mark
the module as "unloading". This should force
try_inc_mod_use_count() to fail, causing its caller to behave like
the associated resource (e.g. filesystem) isn't actually
registered, and to call request_module().
2. request_module() should simply ignore modules marked as
"unloading". It should proceed to call "insmod" etc.
3. sys_create_module() or sys_init_module() should block if there is
a module of the same name currently in the "unloading" state.
They should block until that module's cleanup_module() returns.
4. At this point, the new instance of the module will initialise,
request_module() calls will return and the callers which called
try_inc_mod_use_count() in step 1 will continue with the resource
they needed.
> Now, of course, your module interface is starting to look really
> complex, too. Because you want to solve the "half-loaded" problem, so
> you really want "init" to reserve resources, and "start" to register
> them (ie. start can't fail). So every register_xxx interface needs to
> be split into reserve_xxx and use_xxx.
I don't see the point in this at all. What half-loaded problem? If a
module is destroyed, then reloaded and fails to initialise properly:
tough. It lost the resources fair and square.
> We can do all this, of course. I have an awful lot of patches. But
> I'm not really happy with any of them.
What do you think of the idea described above?: To mark modules as
"unloading" (as we do now), use synchronise_kernel() for an rcu-style
safety pause (as you suggested), and change module loading so that a
dying module is waited for before its replacement takes over?
-- Jamie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-12 2:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-04 18:02 Question about pseudo filesystems Jamie Lokier
2002-09-07 12:00 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-07 13:36 ` Alexander Viro
2002-09-07 18:27 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-09-07 19:47 ` Alexander Viro
2002-09-08 2:21 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-09-08 2:43 ` Alexander Viro
2002-09-15 1:41 ` Moving a mount point (was Re: Question about pseudo filesystems) Rob Landley
2002-09-08 16:00 ` Question about pseudo filesystems Daniel Phillips
2002-09-09 19:48 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-09-09 20:06 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 0:44 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-09-10 1:40 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 1:56 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-09-10 2:53 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 3:26 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-09-10 3:47 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 9:15 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 10:17 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-11 18:35 ` [RFC] Raceless module interface Daniel Phillips
2002-09-11 18:53 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-09-11 19:20 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-11 20:29 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-09-11 21:15 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-11 21:26 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-09-11 21:47 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 1:42 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-12 2:09 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2002-09-12 3:13 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-12 3:47 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 3:53 ` Alexander Viro
2002-09-12 4:11 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 4:40 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-12 5:27 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 14:46 ` Gerhard Mack
2002-09-13 0:39 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-13 2:23 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 5:35 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-12 4:52 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-12 5:58 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 7:00 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-13 8:18 ` Helge Hafting
2002-09-12 3:32 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 1:31 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-12 9:10 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-09-12 11:27 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-12 13:03 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-12 13:44 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-13 1:30 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-13 2:19 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 6:51 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-13 13:34 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 13:52 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-13 14:09 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 14:33 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-13 14:44 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 14:59 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-13 15:17 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 15:27 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-13 15:37 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 2:17 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-16 16:13 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 16:36 ` Understanding the Principles of Argumentation #3 Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 16:42 ` Robinson Maureira Castillo
2002-09-16 17:29 ` Cort Dougan
2002-09-16 22:31 ` David Woodhouse
2002-10-01 14:13 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-01 14:27 ` David Woodhouse
2002-09-13 15:59 ` [RFC] Raceless module interface Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 3:14 ` David Gibson
2002-09-13 10:35 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-13 13:53 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 15:13 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-13 15:30 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 15:55 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-13 16:09 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 16:39 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-13 17:12 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 0:24 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-09-16 1:49 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-16 21:36 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-16 21:48 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 22:44 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-11 15:28 ` Question about pseudo filesystems Bill Davidsen
2002-09-11 19:36 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-09 20:12 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-09 22:56 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-09-10 1:39 ` Alexander Viro
2002-09-09 20:18 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 6:48 ` Kai Henningsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020912030933.A13608@kushida.apsleyroad.org \
--to=lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver@neukum.name \
--cc=phillips@arcor.de \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=viro@math.psu.edu \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).