[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1271934535.11751.1550.camel@macbook.infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:08:55 +0100
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <virtuoso@...nd.org>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: Do not corrupt backing device for inode
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 18:21 +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> + /*
> + * We cannot modify file->f_mapping->backing_dev_info directly,
> + * because it will corrupt backing device for inode, since
> + * inode->i_mapping is equal to file->f_mapping. So we have to
> + * copy f_mapping first.
> + */
> + file->f_mapping = kmalloc(sizeof(*file->f_mapping), GFP_KERNEL);
> + memcpy(file->f_mapping, inode->i_mapping,
> + sizeof(*file->f_mapping));
> file->f_mapping->backing_dev_info = mtd->backing_dev_info;
> + }
Ick. What about the rest of file->f_mapping? That'll still be inherited.
Jan pointed at drivers/char/raw.c as an example, but that doesn't do
anything as ugly as this -- that sets file->f_mapping to point at
bdev->bd_inode->i_mapping instead.
I suspect we should do something similar -- have an inode for the MTD
device, with a valid i_data of its own.
--
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@...el.com Intel Corporation
--
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