Andrew Morton wrote:
Recursive lock_kernel() is OK.
Oh, it is? Clearly I am not well versed in the BKL... that's probably a good thing.... :)
Ok, let me look into it further. I changed lock_kernel to udf_lock_kernel to complain & backtrace if we re-lock, and it always immediately hung after that; I assumed that was it. I'll investigate further.
-Eric - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Cyrill Gorcunov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- References:
- [PATCH 1/2] Fix possible UDF data corruption
- From: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Eric Sandeen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Eric Sandeen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Cyrill Gorcunov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Eric Sandeen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Cyrill Gorcunov <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 1/2] Fix possible UDF data corruption
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] SPI FLASH naming conflicts solving
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
- Index(es):
 |