On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:59:39PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:

quoted text
> I really don't like the entire scheme, to be honest.  BTW, what happens
> if you try to add the same device to the same array after having it kicked
> out?  If that comes before your delayed kobject_del(), the things will
> get nasty since sysfs will (rightfully) refuse to add another entry with
> the same name and parent while the old one is still there and for all
> sysfs knows is going to stay there...

More fun questions: what are the locking requirements for ->resize()?
You are calling it with no exclusion whatsoever...  What about
bind_rdev_to_array()?  At the very least, you want to protect
mddev->disks, and AFAICS new_dev_store() has no exclusion at all.
And I suspect that you have other things in there in need of protection
(finding free desc_nr, for one); can all of those be handled by simple
spinlocks?
--
unsubscribe notice
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/