linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fixes for vfs-scale and vfs-automount

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <1298518137.2916.35.camel@perseus>
Date:	Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:28:57 +0800
From:	Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fixes for vfs-scale and vfs-automount

On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 03:14 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:03:38AM +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> 
> > I also have a sick feeling that dentrys may become negative at any point
> > after __d_lookup_rcu() .....
> 
> Yes.  To get stability of ->d_inode (assuming the sucker isn't pinned down
> in normal way by ->d_count) you need ->d_lock.
> 
> > > Ho-hum...  I can reach RHTS, but I'd rather do that at home boxen, if
> > > possible...  Has it been reproduced on UP boxen with SMP kernels, BTW?
> > 
> > Nope, I'd need to build a kernel specifically for that. I'm not sure how
> > useful that would be though since the test is specifically meant to
> > expose problems with multiple concurrent processes accessing an
> > automount tree. I don't see any problem running the Connectathon tests
> > which is essentially one automount and one client process.
> 
> Heh...  No, it's just that the only SMP box I have locally right now
> is dual ultrasparc.  Anyway, I can live with RHTS.

If you want to get hold of the test I'm using checkout autofs-RHEL-5,
"cd autofs-tests/submount-test", "make rpm" and use the resulting
rh-tests-autofs-submount-test-1.0-15.noarch.rpm. There are some
beaker/rhts rpm dependencies. Let me know if it gets painful and I'll
try and work out what you need. The test isn't very flash but it does
stress autofs.

Ha, I haven't even turned on my Ultrsparc 2 in months, it's only got an
old version of Solaris on it now anyway, ;)


--
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/