Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:50:47 -0700 | From | Jason Gunthorpe <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] New Microsemi PCI Switch Management Driver |
| |
On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 05:23:38PM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> > That could help, but this would mean cdev would have to insert a shim > > to grab locks around the various file ops. > > Hmm, I was hoping something more along the lines of actually killing the > processes instead of just shimming away fops.
That would probably make most cdev users unhappy, it is not what we want in tpm or infiniband, for instance.
> > AFAIK TPM is correct and has been robustly tested now. We have a 'vtpm' > > driver that agressively uses hot-unplug. > > Switchtec is a bit more tricky because a) there's no upper level driver > to handle things
Introducing a light split between 'the upper part that owns the cdev' and 'the lower part that owns the hardware' makes things much easier to understand in a driver and it becomes clearer where, eg, devm actions should be linked (ie probably not to the cdev part)
> and b) userspace may be inside a wait_for_completion (via read or > poll) that needs to be completed. If a so called 'cdev_kill' could > actually just kill these processes it would be a bit easier.
For TPM, poll could be something like:
static unsigned int tpm_poll(struct file *filp, struct poll_table_struct *wait) { poll_wait(filp, &chip->poll_wait, wait); if (tpm_try_get_ops(chip)) { mask = chip->ops->driver_do_poll(...); tpm_put_ops(chip); } else mask = POLLIN | POLLRDHUP | POLLOUT | POLLERR | POLLHUP; return mask; }
And we would trigger chip->poll_wait in the unregister.
wait_for_completion is similar, drop the rwsem while sleeping, add 'ops = NULL' to the sleeping condition test, trigger the wait on unregister then reacquire the rwsem and test ops on wake.
Jason
| |