[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130318042144.447774669@decadent.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 04:21:46 +0000
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...ionio.com>
Subject: [ 02/82] btrfs: Init io_lock after cloning btrfs device struct
3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
commit 1cba0cdf5e4dbcd9e5fa5b54d7a028e55e2ca057 upstream.
__btrfs_close_devices() clones btrfs device structs with
memcpy(). Some of the fields in the clone are reinitialized, but it's
missing to init io_lock. In mainline this goes unnoticed, but on RT it
leaves the plist pointing to the original about to be freed lock
struct.
Initialize io_lock after cloning, so no references to the original
struct are left.
Reported-and-tested-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...ionio.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -543,6 +543,7 @@ static int __btrfs_close_devices(struct
new_device->writeable = 0;
new_device->in_fs_metadata = 0;
new_device->can_discard = 0;
+ spin_lock_init(&new_device->io_lock);
list_replace_rcu(&device->dev_list, &new_device->dev_list);
call_rcu(&device->rcu, free_device);
--
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