[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110222073032.GA4555@swordfish.minsk.epam.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 09:30:32 +0200
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jaxboe@...ionio.com, neilb@...e.de,
sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com, tj@...nel.org, jmoyer@...hat.com,
snitzer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] loop: No need to initialize ->queue_lock explicitly
before calling blk_cleanup_queue()
On (02/21/11 22:53), Vivek Goyal wrote:
> o Now we initialize ->queue_lock at queue allocation time so driver does
> not have to worry about initializing it before calling blk_cleanup_queue().
>
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/block/loop.c | 3 ---
> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
> index 49e6a54..44e18c0 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
> @@ -1641,9 +1641,6 @@ out:
>
> static void loop_free(struct loop_device *lo)
> {
> - if (!lo->lo_queue->queue_lock)
> - lo->lo_queue->queue_lock = &lo->lo_queue->__queue_lock;
> -
> blk_cleanup_queue(lo->lo_queue);
> put_disk(lo->lo_disk);
> list_del(&lo->lo_list);
Hi,
(just for note)
There is an incremental patch fixing this case in Andrew's mm tree:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/11/165
(block-fix-queue_lock-null-pointer-derefence-in-blk_throtl_exit-v4.patch
added to -mm tree).
Sergey
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists