On 1/26/24 07:04, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > On Thu, 25 Jan 2024, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 at 10:30, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> There's a problem with the tasklet API - there is no reliable way how to >>> free a structure that contains tasklet_struct. The problem is that the >>> function tasklet_action_common calls task_unlock(t) after it called the >>> callback. If the callback does something that frees tasklet_struct, >>> task_unlock(t) would write into free memory. >> >> Ugh. >> >> I see what you're doing, but I have to say, I dislike this patch >> immensely. It feels like a serious misdesign that is then papered over >> with a hack. >> >> I'd much rather see us trying to move away from tasklets entirely in >> cases like this. Just say "you cannot do that". > > OK. I will delete tasklets from both dm-crypt and dm-verity - it will > simplify them quite a bit. > > BTW. Do you think that we should get rid of request-based device mapper as > well? (that's another thing that looks like code bloat to me) That would force removing dm-multipath, which is I think the only DM driver using requests. But given how widespread the use of dm-multipath is, killing it would likely make a lot of people unhappy... -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
