Re: [PATCH] devcoredump: increase the device delete timeout to 10 mins

From: Greg KH
Date: Fri Feb 11 2022 - 06:10:05 EST


On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 05:55:18PM -0800, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> Hi Johannes
>
> On 2/8/2022 1:54 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Tue, 2022-02-08 at 13:40 -0800, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> > > >
> > > I am checking what usermode sees and will get back ( I didnt see an
> > > error do most likely it was EOF ). I didnt follow the second part.
> >
> > I think probably it got -ENODEV, looking at kernfs_file_read_iter().
> >
> > > If the file descriptor read returns EOF, even if we consider them
> > > separate how will it resolve this issue?
> > >
> > > My earlier questions were related to fixing it in devcoredump to detect
> > > and fix it there. Are you suggesting to fix in usermode instead? How?
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, no, you cannot fix it in userspace.
> >
> > But I just followed the rabbit hole down kernfs and all, and it looks
> > like indeed the read would be cut short with -ENODEV, sorry.
> >
> > It doesn't look like there's good API for this, but it seems at least
> > from the underlying kernfs POV it should be possible to get_device() in
> > open and put_device() in release, so that the device sticks around while
> > somebody has the file open? It's entirely virtual, so this should be OK?
> >
> > johannes
>
> Are you suggesting something like below?
>
> diff --git a/fs/sysfs/file.c b/fs/sysfs/file.c
> index 42dcf96..14203d0 100644
> --- a/fs/sysfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/sysfs/file.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,22 @@ static const struct sysfs_ops *sysfs_file_ops(struct
> kernfs_node *kn)
> return kobj->ktype ? kobj->ktype->sysfs_ops : NULL;
> }
>
> +static int sysfs_kf_open(struct kernfs_open_file *of)
> +{
> + struct kobject *kobj = of->kn->parent->priv;
> + struct device *dev = kobj_to_dev(kobj);
> +
> + get_device(dev);
> +}
> +
> +static void sysfs_kf_release(struct kernfs_open_file *of)
> +{
> + struct kobject *kobj = of->kn->parent->priv;
> + struct device *dev = kobj_to_dev(kobj);
> +
> + put_device(dev);
> +}


That obviously does not work as not everything in sysfs is a struct
device :(