[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20101118.125123.241932424.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:51:23 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: npiggin@...nel.dk
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 01/28] fs: d_validate fixes
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:09:01 +1100
> d_validate has been broken for a long time.
>
> kmem_ptr_validate does not guarantee that a pointer can be dereferenced
> if it can go away at any time. Even rcu_read_lock doesn't help, because
> the pointer might be queued in RCU callbacks but not executed yet.
>
> So the parent cannot be checked, nor the name hashed. The dentry pointer
> can not be touched until it can be verified under lock. Hashing simply
> cannot be used.
>
> Instead, verify the parent/child relationship by traversing parent's
> d_child list. It's slow, but only ncpfs and the destaged smbfs care
> about it, at this point.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
This won't apply because is conflicts with Christoph Hellwig's
RCU conversion of d_validate().
Which is a change that went in more than a month ago.
Thus I'd really appreciate if you mentioned what tree your patches are
against in your "0/N" posting, always.
Thanks.
--
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