On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 03:57:30PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 03:24:53PM -0300, Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski wrote: > > While looking at commit 3f9a5aa ("floppy: Cleanup disk->queue before > > caling put_disk() if add_disk() was never called") I noticed some > > problems with the error handling and cleanup: > > > > * missing cleanup (put_disk) if blk_init_queue fails, dr is decremented > > first in the error handling loop > > * if something fails in the add_disk loop, there is no cleanup of > > previous iterations in the error handling. > > * "if (disks[dr]->queue)" check is bogus, when reaching there for each > > dr should exist an queue allocated, and it doesn't take into account > > iterations where add_disk wasn't done, if failure happens in add_disk > > loop. > > * floppy_module_exit doesn't reset queue pointer if add_disk wasn't > > done. > > Hey, these seem to be multiple cleanups. Can you break these down into > individual patches. Review becomes easy.
I'll resend with the fixes broken up. > > [..] > > + blk_cleanup_queue(disks[dr]->queue); > > + /* > > + * put_disk() may not be paired with add_disk() and > > + * will put queue reference one extra time. fix it. > > + */ > > + if (dr > registered || !(allowed_drive_mask & (1 << dr)) || > > + fdc_state[FDC(dr)].version == FDC_NONE) > > disks[dr]->queue = NULL; > > I think checking for FDC_NONE and allowed_drive_mask() in multiple places > is becoming unreadable now. Can we just maintain a separate array to keep > track of disks on which we have called add_disk() and do the cleanup > accordingly. > > static unsigned short disk_registered[N_DRIVE]; > > /* do add_disk */ > disk_registered[drive] = 1; > > > out_put_disk: > while(dr--) { > if (disks[dr]->queue && !disk_registered[dr]) { > blk_cleanup_queue() > disks[dr]->queue = NULL; > } > } > > Same disk_registered[] can be used for your other loop of remove drives. > Also it can be used in cleaning up code in floppy_module_exit(). > > I think this will make code much more readable. Right now this error > handling loop is just getting too complicated. Complicated as many other code in the kernel :), but yes, we can do better here, your proposed solution looks good, I'll redo the changes with it, thanks for the review. > > Thanks > Vivek > -- []'s Herton -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/