linux-kernel - Re: nfsd changes for 2.6.37

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:39:25 -0400
From:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Bryan Schumaker <bjschuma@...app.com>,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: nfsd changes for 2.6.37

Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > If you don't hold lock_flocks throughout fcntl_setlease, the flp variable
> > points to a flock that may get modified by another thread and you call
> > time_out_leases() without holding lock_flocks, which it requires.

Whoops, thanks for catching that.

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 04:39:24AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Do locks_alloc_lock and initialization of the heap struct file_lock
> in the caller.  This also avoids an entirely useless copy of the
> lock structure.  free the passed in structure if we are modifying
> an existing lock structure.

That sounds good; I'll give it a try.

--b.
--
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/