Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 10:31:01AM +0530, Maneesh Soni wrote:
>> On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 08:16:10PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> Allowing attribute and symlink dentries to be reclaimed means
>>> sd->s_dentry can change dynamically. However, updates to the field
>>> are unsynchronized leading to race conditions. This patch adds
>>> sysfs_lock and use it to synchronize updates to sd->s_dentry.
>>>
>>> Due to the locking around ->d_iput, the check in sysfs_drop_dentry()
>>> is complex. sysfs_lock only protect sd->s_dentry pointer itself. The
>>> validity of the dentry is protected by dcache_lock, so whether dentry
>>> is alive or not can only be tested while holding both locks.
>>>
>>> This is minimal backport of sysfs_drop_dentry() rewrite in devel
>>> branch.
>>>
>>> DONT APPLY JUST YET
>> Looks ok to me.. I have tested it it but unfortunately I couldn't
>> recreate the race without the patch also. It would be helpful if
>> people actually seeing the race, provide the test results.
>>
>> Greg, please merge this one once we have some test results.
>
> Can someone just resend it after those test results are in, with the
> proper signed-off-by, so I know it's safe to apply?
I'll resend with S-O-B after someone verifies it fixes the problem.
--
tejun
-
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]
