[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46F8C740.6040003@openvz.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:30:56 +0400
From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix messed hunks in generic_setlease
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:57:45 +0400 Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org> wrote:
>
>> I have noticed, that one hunk was lost and one duplicated
>> during merging the fix-potential-oops-in-generic_setlease(-xxx)
>> patches. One of the fixes is already in the hot-fixes, but the
>> second one is still lost.
>>
>> The returned pointer was not the one allocated, but some temporary
>> used to scan through the inode's locks list. This caused and OOPS
>> during Kamalesh's testing.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
>> index c0fe71a..c1198e3 100644
>> --- a/fs/locks.c
>> +++ b/fs/locks.c
>> @@ -1423,7 +1418,7 @@ int generic_setlease(struct file *filp,
>> locks_copy_lock(new_fl, lease);
>> locks_insert_lock(before, new_fl);
>>
>> - *flp = fl;
>> + *flp = new_fl;
>> return 0;
>>
>> out:
>
> argh, what a mess - there are way too many trees playing with fs/locks.c.
>
> umm, I think this is not a mismerge and that the original patch
> (http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/9/20/141) had this bug in it.
Indeed... :(
> And I've just sent that buggy patch to Linus. Do you agree?
Shame on me... Sorry :(
(going to the blackboard to write "I will check my patches twice before
sending them to Andrew" for 100 times)
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists