Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Sun, 2 Apr 2006 15:09:46 -0700 | From | "Joshua Hudson" <> | Subject | Re: RFC replace some locking of i_sem wiht atomic_t |
| |
On 4/2/06, Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 11:01:30AM -0700, Joshua Hudson wrote: > > Herein lies the problem with the current locking scheme: > > 1. rename locks target if it exists, but target may be created by > > link() immediately > > after the check&lock procedure. > > 2. The target of link() is completely unprotected. > > 3. You have failed to RTFS or RTFM. > Ah here we are
directory-locking.txt shows link() does: lock parent insure that source is not a directory lock source
Let me guess, parent means parent of target, not parent of source. This has been confusing me for months. Thanks for streightning me out. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |