On 7/18/07, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
Tejun Heo wrote:
> Satyam Sharma wrote:
>>>> sysfs_find_dirent() -- to check for -EEXIST -- should be called
>>>> *before* we create the new dentry for the to-be-created symlink
>>>> in the first place. [ It's weird to grab a reference on the target
>>>> for ourselves (and in fact even allocate the new dirent for the
>>>> to-be-created symlink) and /then/ check for erroneous usage,
>>>> and then go about undoing all that we should never have done
>>>> at all. ] So this test could, and should, be made earlier, IMHO.
>>> Locking.
>> Well s/sysfs_find_dirent/sysfs_get_dirent/ then. And then simply put
>> down the reference later.
>
> Isn't that the current code?
Oops, somehow thought you were talking about allocating it first.
Gee... what difference does using sysfs_get_dirent() make? Do you think
the following code is correct?
sd = sysfs_get_dirent("some name");
if (sd != NULL)
return -EEXIST;
lock;
add_new_node("some name");
unlock;
sysfs_put_dirent(sd);
Nopes, it's not, of course. We'd need the parent's i_mutex as well
as the sysfs_mutex around both the EEXIST check as well as the
actual sysfs_add_one(), which is precisely what sysfs_addrm_start
and finish are, so you're right ... I'll factor this in.
Satyam
-
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]
