Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF

[Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>]

Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> [Eric Sandeen - Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 12:17:53PM -0500]
> | 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
> | 
>
> Btw, Andrew is there any way to force kernel to use special UDF module
> instead of compiled-in one? (Sorry for stupid question ;)

Not if it's  already built in (at least not with more hackery than it's 
worth...) - just rebuild your kernel w/ udf as a module.

BTW my testcase before was bogus, that's not what's causing the lockup. 
 I'll keep investigating now that I know what *not* to look for. ;-)

-Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/