On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 10:50:56PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> > +/*
>> > + * This is an exported API for the block driver, and will not
>> > + * acquire bd_mutex, leaving it up to the caller to handle
>> > + * any necessary locking.
>>
>> Actually, the function is introduced and should be used in case
>> that bd_mutex has been held already, such as clearing fd in
>> loop release().
>>
>> > + */
>> > +int __blkdev_reread_part(struct block_device *bdev)
>> > {
>> > struct gendisk *disk = bdev->bd_disk;
>> >
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&bdev->bd_mutex);
>
> is an excellent means of avoiding that comment and verifying its
> actually true :-)
Exactly, and it has been added in my local tree, :-)
>
>> > if (!disk_part_scan_enabled(disk) || bdev != bdev->bd_contains)
>> > return -EINVAL;
>> > if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
>> > return -EACCES;
>> > +
>> > + return rescan_partitions(disk, bdev);
>> > +}
>> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__blkdev_reread_part);
>> > +
>> > +/*
>> > + * This is an exported API for the block driver, and will
>> > + * acquire bd_mutex. Make sure you aren't calling it with
>> > + * bd_mutex already held, or we'll return -EBUSY.
>>
>> Strictly speaking, it should be "Make sure you aren't calling it
>> with bd_mutex already held in current context".
>>
>> > + */
>> > +int blkdev_reread_part(struct block_device *bdev)
>> > +{
>> > + int res;
>> > +
>> > if (!mutex_trylock(&bdev->bd_mutex))
>> > return -EBUSY;
>
> Is that really needed? It seems rather poor form.
The trylock will be replaced with mutex_lock in patch 6.
>
>> > - res = rescan_partitions(disk, bdev);
>> > + res = __blkdev_reread_part(bdev);
>> > mutex_unlock(&bdev->bd_mutex);
>> > +
>> > return res;
>> > }
>> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(blkdev_reread_part);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
