James Smart <[email protected]> writes:
> I don't believe this is a valid fix. This is yet another case
> of the reuse-after-free issues on sdevs. The real issue is the
> deleted sdev isn't truly getting deleted due to references, and
> we're deadlocked trying to allocate a new one while the old one
> is outstanding. This fix just jumps over things. You're actually
> using a partially torn down sdev that, if the refcounts ever
> decremented, would be zapped - and you would be in a bunch of trouble.
I see. Can you explain more about reuse-after-free issue on sdevs? Is
there any test case or any info? Or is there any plan to fix it?
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <[email protected]>
-
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]
