Jarkko Lavinen wrote:
> Hi Steven
>
> Sorry for late reply.
>
>> It has to reference-count its objects so that they are not freed as long
>> as they are used by upper layers,
>
> The block layer and device removal seems to be designed from
> top-down approach. Althouh disc is referenced from
> __blkdev_get(), disc's request queue is not. Also
> blk_cleanup_queue() calls elevator_exit() without caring if
> anyone still uses the elevator.
[...]
I still don't understand how there can be a problem here. Shouldn't the
sequence be:
1. low-level determines that a device went away
2. low-level takes note that from now on no new requests must be
enqueued anymore
3. low-level calls blk_cleanup_queue
4. blk_cleanup_queue waits until remaining requests are done
(it calls blk_sync_queue)
5. blk_cleanup_queue cleans up block layer data
6. low-level can now clean up/ free its own data
Does the MMC layer miss step 2? Because without this, step 4 would be
in vain.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--= =-== ---==
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
