On Thu, 2006-10-19 at 21:40 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:03:58 -0400
> Trond Myklebust <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > +static struct dentry *__d_unalias(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *alias)
> > +{
> > + struct mutex *m1 = NULL, *m2 = NULL;
> > + struct dentry *ret;
> > +
> > + /* If alias and dentry share a parent, then no extra locks required */
> > + if (alias->d_parent == dentry->d_parent)
> > + goto out_unalias;
> > +
> > + /* Check for loops */
> > + ret = ERR_PTR(-ELOOP);
> > + if (d_isparent(alias, dentry))
> > + goto out_err;
> > +
> > + /* See lock_rename() */
> > + ret = ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
> > + if (!mutex_trylock(&dentry->d_sb->s_vfs_rename_mutex))
> > + goto out_err;
> > + m1 = &dentry->d_sb->s_vfs_rename_mutex;
> > + if (!mutex_trylock(&alias->d_parent->d_inode->i_mutex))
> > + goto out_err;
> > + m2 = &alias->d_parent->d_inode->i_mutex;
> > +out_unalias:
> > + d_move_locked(alias, dentry);
> > + ret = alias;
> > +out_err:
> > + spin_unlock(&dcache_lock);
> > + if (m2)
> > + mutex_unlock(m2);
> > + if (m1)
> > + mutex_unlock(m1);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> The locking in there is, of course, gruesome. There is no way in which it
> can be made reliable?
The generic lookup() code will grab the dir->i_mutex for the parent
directory before we get anywhere near __d_alias(). That pretty much
limits us to using mutex_trylock() since otherwise we break the nesting
rules for lock_rename(), and I can't see that we can release the
problematic dir->i_mutex without causing worse races.
Cheers,
Trond
-
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]
