On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 05:39:25AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 12:34:34PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > I'll pile up a fix. I've also considered doing a full review of callers
> > outside of the core block layer using it, and maybe just unexporting
> > this. It was originally exported due to commit d86e0e83b ("block: export
> > blk_{get,put}_queue()") to fix a scsi bug, but I can't find such
> > respective fix. I suspec that using bdgrab()/bdput() seems more likely
> > what drivers should be using. That would allow us to keep this
> > functionality internal.
> >
> > Think that's worthy review?
>
> Probably. I did in fact very quickly look into that but then gave
> up due to the fair amount of modular users.
Alright, then might as well then verify if the existing practice of
bdgrab()/bdput() is indeed valid logic, as otherwise we'd be puting
the atomic context / sleep concern to bdput(). As noted earlier I
am able to confirm easily that bdgrab() can be called in atomic contex,
however I cannot easily yet vet for *why* this was a safe assumption for
bdput().
Luis
