linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fscache: extended "dying" check before emitting EV

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5827.1366736266@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:	Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:57:46 +0100
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Max Kellermann <mk@...all.com>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, linux-cachefs@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fscache: extended "dying" check before emitting EV_INVALIDATE

Max Kellermann <mk@...all.com> wrote:

> Before emitting an FSCACHE_OBJECT_EV_INVALIDATE event, the function
> __fscache_invalidate() checks whether the fscache_object is currently
> "dying".  This checks only the current state, not the queued events
> that will very soon lead to the object's death.

This should not be a problem, I think.  EV_RETIRE and EV_RELEASE should only be
set by fscache_relinquish_cookie().  If you (the netfs) call that to dispose of
a cookie to fscache, you shouldn't thereafter be calling fscache_invalidate()
on it.  The only case in which __fscache_invalidate() should see a dying object
is if the caching backend withdraws it (ie. EV_WITHDRAW is set).

Do you have a backtrace?

David
--
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/