linux-kernel - Re: Yet another borken page_count() check in invalidate_inode

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 15 Nov 2006 11:24:26 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
Cc:	Charles Edward Lever <chucklever@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Yet another borken page_count() check in
 invalidate_inode_pages2()....

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:05:13 -0500
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 08:46 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> > but nobody could have started another writeback after the "..." because they
> > couldn't have got the lock_page(), and lock_page() is required for
> > ->writepage()?
> 
> Nothing can have called writepage(), but something may be calling
> ->writepages(). That may call set_page_writeback without taking the page
> lock.
> 

The protocol is

	lock_page()
	set_page_writeback()
	->writepage()

and there are various places which assume that nobody will start new
writeout of a locked page.  But I forget where they are - things have always
been this way.

If NFS is running set_page_writeback() against an unlocked page then I
don't know what will break.  I didn't know it was doing that.

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