linux-kernel - doesn't nfs_access_cache_shrinker() race with umount?

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9106c300801150112u7bf369e8rb01cd29a19c27e68@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:12:01 +0800
From:	"yawei niu" <yawei.niu@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: doesn't nfs_access_cache_shrinker() race with umount?

Hi, NFS/VFS gurus

nfs_access_cache_shrinker() calls igrab() without serialized with
umount process, looks that might cause the "busy inode" after umount,
doesn't it?

I think we need to serialize the generic_shutdown_super() and
nfs_access_cache_shrinker() just like the dcache/icache shrinker, am I
understanding right?

Thanks
- Niu
--
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/