[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130531163834.GA31086@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:38:34 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@...il.com>,
Sha Zhengju <handai.szj@...bao.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] proc: simplify proc_task_readdir/first_tid paths
Eric, sorry for delay.
On 05/29, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> writes:
>
> > Why the empty "." + ".." dir is bad if the task(s) has gone away after
> > opendir?
>
> Because the definition of a deleted directory that you are in is that
> getdents will return -ENOENT.
>
> You can reproduce this with any linux filesystem.
> mkdir foo
> cd foo
> rmdir ../foo
> strace -f ls .
>
> open(".", O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK|O_DIRECTORY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
> getdents(3, 0x1851c88, 32768) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
> close(3) = 0
Heh. Indeed, vfs_readdir() checks IS_DEADDIR().
Thanks.
OK. But this means that even 1/3 is not 100% right, exactly because
leader can be unhashed right before first_tid() takes rcu lock. Easy
to fix, we should simply factor out the "nr != 0" check.
And this also means that 3/3 is not right by the same reason. I'll
make a simpler patch which only avoids the unnecessary get/put in
proc_task_readdir().
Unless we can tolerate this very unlikely rase when the leader goes
away after initial ENOENT check at the start, of course... Or unless
we add canceldir() which resets getdents_callback->previous so that
we could return ENOENT after filldir() was already called ;)
Thanks Eric. I'll send v2.
Oleg.
--
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