On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:29 PM Mike Snitzer wrote:
>
> From: Ming Lei
>
> 'dmsetup remove' and 'dmsetup remove_all' require synchronous bdev
> release. Otherwise dm_lock_for_deletion() may return -EBUSY if the open
> count is > 0, because the open count is dropped in dm_blk_close()
> which
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 09:32:55AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:28:42AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > From: Ming Lei
> >
> > 'dmsetup remove' and 'dmsetup remove_all' require synchronous bdev
> > release. Otherwise dm_lock_for_deletion() may return -EBUSY if the open
> >
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:28:42AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> From: Ming Lei
>
> 'dmsetup remove' and 'dmsetup remove_all' require synchronous bdev
> release. Otherwise dm_lock_for_deletion() may return -EBUSY if the open
> count is > 0, because the open count is dropped in dm_blk_close()
>
From: Ming Lei
'dmsetup remove' and 'dmsetup remove_all' require synchronous bdev
release. Otherwise dm_lock_for_deletion() may return -EBUSY if the open
count is > 0, because the open count is dropped in dm_blk_close()
which occurs after fput() completes.
So if dm_blk_close() is delayed
