Re: [PATCH 12/17] fuse: add connection aborting

> >
> >  	unsigned mounted : 1;
> >  	unsigned connected : 1;
> 
> Do these bitfields have locking?

Yes, these ones do have locking, but the others that follow don't,
which would cause similar problems.  I'll revise this part of the
code.

Thanks,
Miklos
-
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/

References:
- [PATCH 00/17] fuse: fixes, cleanups and asynchronous read requests
  - From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 12/17] fuse: add connection aborting
  - From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 12/17] fuse: add connection aborting
  - From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 11/17] fuse: add number of waiting requests attribute
Next by Date: Re: ntohs/ntohl and bitops
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 12/17] fuse: add connection aborting
Next by thread: [PATCH 09/17] fuse: extend semantics of connected flag
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]