From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@parallels.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs: handle duplicate removal attempts in sysfs_remove_group()
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 23:43:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1885021.E6XxJipFub@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo5s9chjgSaA2kqE_72f=+2Lq9HQLM3xstw8Avg+Nx63xA@mail.gmail.com>
On Friday, November 22, 2013 08:43:55 AM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc Rafael, James]
>
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> > (cc'ing Bjorn)
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 03:09:58PM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> >> Commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive) changed
> >> the behavior so that directory removals will be done recursively. This
> >> means that the sysfs group might already be removed if its parent directory
> >> has been removed.
> >>
> >> The current code outputs warnings similar to following log snippet when it
> >> detects that there is no group for the given kobject:
> >>
> >> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 4 at fs/sysfs/group.c:214 sysfs_remove_group+0xc6/0xd0()
> >> sysfs group ffffffff81c6f1e0 not found for kobject 'host7'
> >> Modules linked in:
> >> CPU: 0 PID: 4 Comm: kworker/0:0 Not tainted 3.12.0+ #13
> >> Hardware name: /D33217CK, BIOS GKPPT10H.86A.0042.2013.0422.1439 04/22/2013
> >> Workqueue: kacpi_hotplug acpi_hotplug_work_fn
> >> 0000000000000009 ffff8801002459b0 ffffffff817daab1 ffff8801002459f8
> >> ffff8801002459e8 ffffffff810436b8 0000000000000000 ffffffff81c6f1e0
> >> ffff88006d440358 ffff88006d440188 ffff88006e8b4c28 ffff880100245a48
> >> Call Trace:
> >> [<ffffffff817daab1>] dump_stack+0x45/0x56
> >> [<ffffffff810436b8>] warn_slowpath_common+0x78/0xa0
> >> [<ffffffff81043727>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x47/0x50
> >> [<ffffffff811ae526>] sysfs_remove_group+0xc6/0xd0
> >> [<ffffffff81432f7e>] dpm_sysfs_remove+0x3e/0x50
> >> [<ffffffff8142a0d0>] device_del+0x40/0x1b0
> >> [<ffffffff8142a24d>] device_unregister+0xd/0x20
> >> [<ffffffff8144131a>] scsi_remove_host+0xba/0x110
> >> [<ffffffff8145f526>] ata_host_detach+0xc6/0x100
> >> [<ffffffff8145f578>] ata_pci_remove_one+0x18/0x20
> >> [<ffffffff812e8f48>] pci_device_remove+0x28/0x60
> >> [<ffffffff8142d854>] __device_release_driver+0x64/0xd0
> >> [<ffffffff8142d8de>] device_release_driver+0x1e/0x30
> >> [<ffffffff8142d257>] bus_remove_device+0xf7/0x140
> >> [<ffffffff8142a1b1>] device_del+0x121/0x1b0
> >> [<ffffffff812e43d4>] pci_stop_bus_device+0x94/0xa0
> >> [<ffffffff812e437b>] pci_stop_bus_device+0x3b/0xa0
> >> [<ffffffff812e437b>] pci_stop_bus_device+0x3b/0xa0
> >> [<ffffffff812e44dd>] pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device+0xd/0x20
> >> [<ffffffff812fc743>] trim_stale_devices+0x73/0xe0
> >> [<ffffffff812fc78b>] trim_stale_devices+0xbb/0xe0
> >> [<ffffffff812fc78b>] trim_stale_devices+0xbb/0xe0
> >> [<ffffffff812fcb6e>] acpiphp_check_bridge+0x7e/0xd0
> >> [<ffffffff812fd90d>] hotplug_event+0xcd/0x160
> >> [<ffffffff812fd9c5>] hotplug_event_work+0x25/0x60
> >> [<ffffffff81316749>] acpi_hotplug_work_fn+0x17/0x22
> >> [<ffffffff8105cf3a>] process_one_work+0x17a/0x430
> >> [<ffffffff8105db29>] worker_thread+0x119/0x390
> >> [<ffffffff81063a5d>] kthread+0xcd/0xf0
> >> [<ffffffff817eb33c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> >
> > So, we do have cases where the parent is removed before the child. I
> > suppose the parent pci bridge is removed already? AFAICS this
> > shouldn't break anything but people did seem to expect the removals to
> > be ordered from child to parent. Bjorn, is this something you expect
> > to happened?
>
> I do not expect a PCI bridge to be removed before the devices below
> it. We should be removing all the children before removing the parent
> bridge.
Precisely.
> But is this related to PCI? I don't see the connection yet. I tried
> to look into this a bit (my notes are at
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65281), but I haven't
> figured out the big-picture problem yet.
>
> I don't have warm fuzzies that adding a "have we already removed this"
> check is the best resolution, but maybe that's just because I don't
> understand the problem.
I don't think this is related to removing the parent before the child.
It complains about the 'power' directory of all devices being removed
it seems.
Thanks!
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-22 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-19 13:09 Mika Westerberg
2013-11-19 13:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-20 6:18 ` Tejun Heo
2013-11-20 9:56 ` [PATCH v2] " Mika Westerberg
2013-11-22 15:43 ` [PATCH] " Bjorn Helgaas
2013-11-22 16:02 ` Tejun Heo
2013-11-25 10:29 ` James Bottomley
2013-11-25 12:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-22 22:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2013-11-23 22:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-23 22:53 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-11-23 23:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-23 23:07 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-11-23 23:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-24 1:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-24 15:05 ` Tejun Heo
2013-11-25 10:11 ` Mika Westerberg
2013-11-25 10:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-25 23:51 ` Gwendal Grignou
2013-11-25 12:19 ` [PATCH] ATA: Fix port removal ordering Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-27 1:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-27 4:34 ` Jingoo Han
2013-11-27 18:56 ` Tejun Heo
2013-11-24 0:17 ` [PATCH] PCI: Move device_del() from pci_stop_dev() to pci_destroy_dev() Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-25 4:54 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-11-25 4:58 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-11-25 11:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-25 19:48 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-11-25 11:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-25 19:45 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-11-25 20:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-25 9:47 ` Mika Westerberg
2013-11-25 11:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-25 21:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-11-25 22:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-11-28 0:41 ` Jingoo Han
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=1885021.E6XxJipFub@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=JBottomley@parallels.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®