[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1277343350.2841.33.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:35:50 +0800
From: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
To: "J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05@...oo.co.jp>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
vaurora@...hat.com, autofs@...ux.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, jblunck@...e.de
Subject: Re: [autofs] [PATCH 04/38] autofs4: Save autofs trigger's vfsmount
in super block info
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 11:07 +0900, J. R. Okajima wrote:
> Ian Kent:
> > I may be missing something about this, but why is it safe to use
> > iterate_mounts(), since it doesn't take the vfsmount_lock when
> > traversing the list of mounts?
>
> The sample code was not correct.
> We need to acquire vfsmount_lock or down_read(namespace_sem).
This is looking more and more suspect the more I dig.
The only place iterate_mounts() is called is within the audit subsystem
AFAICS, and I don't see where vfsmount_lock is taken in that code. OTOH,
in fs/namespace.c it is pretty clear that vfsmount->mnt_list is
protected by the vfsmount_lock.
Ummm ... that's gota be broken but maybe someone can give a reason why
it isn't?
Ian
--
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