[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SN4PR0401MB359872451E6F7B11AF1435B09B380@SN4PR0401MB3598.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:17:07 +0000
From: Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@....com>
To: "Zhang, Qiang" <Qiang.Zhang@...driver.com>,
"clm@...com" <clm@...com>,
"josef@...icpanda.com" <josef@...icpanda.com>,
"dsterba@...e.com" <dsterba@...e.com>,
"syzbot+582e66e5edf36a22c7b0@...kaller.appspotmail.com"
<syzbot+582e66e5edf36a22c7b0@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
CC: "linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 回复: 回复: [PATCH] btrfs: Fix missing close devices
On 23/09/2020 08:03, Zhang, Qiang wrote:
> Hello Johannes Thumshirn
>
> the crash happend in "snprintf(s->s_id, sizeof(s->s_id), "%pg", bdev)" in btrfs_mount_root func, the "bdev" may be destroyed in btrfs_close_devices.
> I think add btrfs_close_devices func before deactivate_locked_super is reasonable.
> I'm not sure if that's another problem .
> What's your point of view ?
>
I think this is generally unneeded.
Think of this call chain:
deactivate_locked_super()
`-> fs->kill_sb()
`-> btrfs_kill_super()
`-> kill_anon_super()
`-> generic_shutdown_super()
`-> sop->put_super()
`-> btrfs_put_super()
`-> close_ctree()
`-> btrfs_close_devices()
Powered by blists - more mailing lists