[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150701183942.754491337@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 11:40:24 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Jari Ruusu <jariruusu@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Subject: [PATCH 3.10 19/22] Re: [PATCH 3.10 14/46] d_walk() might skip too much
3.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Jari Ruusu <jariruusu@...rs.sourceforge.net>
When Al Viro's VFS deadlock fix "deal with deadlock in d_walk()" was
backported to 3.10.y 3.4.y and 3.2.y stable kernel brances, the deadlock fix
was copied to 3 different places. Later, a bug in that code was discovered.
Al Viro's fix involved fixing only one part of code in mainline kernel. That
fix is called "d_walk() might skip too much".
3.10.y 3.4.y and 3.2.y stable kernel brances need that later fix copied to 3
different places. Greg Kroah-Hartman included Al Viro's "d_walk() might skip
too much" fix only once in 3.10.80 kernel, leaving 2 more places without a
fix.
The patch below was not written by me. I only applied Al Viro's "d_walk()
might skip too much" fix 2 more times to 3.10.80 kernel, and cheched that
the fixes went to correct places. With this patch applied, all 3 places that
I am aware of 3.10.y stable branch are now fixed.
Signed-off-by: Jari Ruusu <jariruusu@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
fs/dcache.c | 16 ++++++++--------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/dcache.c
+++ b/fs/dcache.c
@@ -1053,13 +1053,13 @@ ascend:
/* might go back up the wrong parent if we have had a rename. */
if (!locked && read_seqretry(&rename_lock, seq))
goto rename_retry;
- next = child->d_child.next;
- while (unlikely(child->d_flags & DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED)) {
+ /* go into the first sibling still alive */
+ do {
+ next = child->d_child.next;
if (next == &this_parent->d_subdirs)
goto ascend;
child = list_entry(next, struct dentry, d_child);
- next = next->next;
- }
+ } while (unlikely(child->d_flags & DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED));
rcu_read_unlock();
goto resume;
}
@@ -2977,13 +2977,13 @@ ascend:
/* might go back up the wrong parent if we have had a rename. */
if (!locked && read_seqretry(&rename_lock, seq))
goto rename_retry;
- next = child->d_child.next;
- while (unlikely(child->d_flags & DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED)) {
+ /* go into the first sibling still alive */
+ do {
+ next = child->d_child.next;
if (next == &this_parent->d_subdirs)
goto ascend;
child = list_entry(next, struct dentry, d_child);
- next = next->next;
- }
+ } while (unlikely(child->d_flags & DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED));
rcu_read_unlock();
goto resume;
}
--
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