Tejun Heo wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
>> On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 10:31:01AM +0530, Maneesh Soni wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 08:16:10PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>>> Allowing attribute and symlink dentries to be reclaimed means
>>>> sd->s_dentry can change dynamically. However, updates to the field
>>>> are unsynchronized leading to race conditions. This patch adds
>>>> sysfs_lock and use it to synchronize updates to sd->s_dentry.
>>>>
>>>> Due to the locking around ->d_iput, the check in sysfs_drop_dentry()
>>>> is complex. sysfs_lock only protect sd->s_dentry pointer itself. The
>>>> validity of the dentry is protected by dcache_lock, so whether dentry
>>>> is alive or not can only be tested while holding both locks.
>>>>
>>>> This is minimal backport of sysfs_drop_dentry() rewrite in devel
>>>> branch.
>>>>
>>>> DONT APPLY JUST YET
>>> Looks ok to me.. I have tested it it but unfortunately I couldn't
>>> recreate the race without the patch also. It would be helpful if
>>> people actually seeing the race, provide the test results.
>>>
>>> Greg, please merge this one once we have some test results.
>> Can someone just resend it after those test results are in, with the
>> proper signed-off-by, so I know it's safe to apply?
>
> I'll resend with S-O-B after someone verifies it fixes the problem.
Have been trying to reproduce the problem on the latest -rc but haven't
succeeded yet. It seems I lost my magic recipe for these races. Did
anyone succeed?
--
tejun
-
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]
