On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 03:45:23PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 02:03:33AM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
> > Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > >Have I missed the posting with analysis of changes in locking scheme
> > >and update of proof of correctness? If so, please give the message ID.
> > >
> > >_That_ had been the major showstopper for any merges, IIRC.
> > >
> > >
> > Ah, the prince of helpfulness has arrived.
> >
> > Yes, as I remember,
>
> Kindly put some efforts into remembering the thread that contains e.g.
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=109347094309283&w=2
>
> If that work (summary: introduction of hybrid objects invalidates the
> existing locking scheme for directories and that had lead at least to
> several user-exploitable deadlocks described in details in the same
> thread; current proof of correctness is in the tree, see
> Documentation/filesystems/Directory-Locking.txt and at the very least
gaaack... Sorry - should've proofread better -
s/Directory-Locking.txt/directory-locking/ in the above.
> it needs to be updated) had been done - please, give the message ID
> of posting with such update. If not - please, arrange getting it done.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
