OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH] usbatm: Update to use the kthread api.
Re: [PATCH] usbatm: Update to use the kthread api. [message #17118 is a reply to message #17116] Wed, 03 January 2007 17:52 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Alan Stern is currently offline  Alan Stern
Messages: 5
Registered: December 2006
Junior Member
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

> >> The probem with signals is that they can come from various sources, most
> >> notably from random kill commands issues from userland.  This defeats
> >> the notion of a fixed thread lifetime under control of the owning module.
> >> Of course this issue doesn't exist for you above useage where you'd
> >> hopefully avoid allowing signals that could terminate the thread.
> >
> > In my case the situation is exactly the reverse: I _want_ to allow signals
> > to terminate the thread (as well as allowing signals to interrupt I/O).

I should have been clearer here.  Signals don't terminate the thread; they
merely notify it to clean up and terminate itself.

> > The reason is simple enough.  At system shutdown, if the thread isn't
> > terminated then it would continue to own an open file, preventing that
> > file's filesystem from being unmounted cleanly.  Since people should be
> > able to unmount their disks during shutdown without having to unload
> > drivers first, the simplest solution is to allow the thread to respond to
> > the TERM signal normally sent by the shutdown scripts.
> >
> > Since the thread is owned by the kernel, random kill commands won't have 
> > any bad effect.  Only kill commands sent by the superuser can terminate 
> > the thread.
> >
> 
> Why in the world would a thread hold a file open for an indeterminate duration?
> That seems very wrong.

The thread uses the file to provide backing storage.  Kind of like the
loop driver, except that my driver uses a higher-level interface into the
VFS than the loop driver does, for greater simplicity.  You wouldn't say
that what the loop driver does is wrong, would you?

> I can just about understand reading a firmware file or something like that
> and close the file afterwards.  But unless you are worrying about a very small
> window I think we have a problem here.

I don't follow.  Why do you think there's a problem?

Alan Stern

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [PATCH] Set a separate lockdep class for neighbour table's proxy_queue
Next Topic: Re: Getting the new RxRPC patches upstream
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Sep 15 18:23:29 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.73182 seconds