Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.6.22.14 oops msg with commvault galaxy ? | From | Vincent Fortier <> | Date | Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:43:41 +0000 |
| |
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 08:12 -0500, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > static void user_attr_init(struct subsys_attribute *sa, char > *name, int mode) > > > > { > > > > + sa->attr.owner = NULL; > > > > sa->attr.name = name; > > > > > > i'm wondering why doesnt this affect 2.6.23 and later? Does sysfs > > > initialize the owner field to NULL automatically? > > > > > > > Going through git log, it seems that commit > > 7b595756ec1f49e0049a9e01a1298d53a7faaa15 deemed attribute->owner as > > unnecessary. I guess that answers the question. > > thx. The only open question seems to be: Vincent had sysfs crashes > without the CFS patchset as well. > > Wouldnt it be prudent to backport the core bits of the above commit > (attached below), to make sure the owner field is never utilized. > (because it seems it's so easy and common to not maintain it properly) > > Vincent, does the patch below resolve the non-CFS crashes?
I was about to test but it does not apply on a 2.6.22: [root@printemps linux-2.6.22.15-rc1-patched]# patch -p1 < ../make_sure_owner_field_is_never_utilized.patch patching file fs/sysfs/bin.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 175. Hunk #2 FAILED at 198. Hunk #3 FAILED at 207. 3 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/sysfs/bin.c.rej patching file fs/sysfs/file.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 241. Hunk #2 FAILED at 250. Hunk #3 FAILED at 266. Hunk #4 FAILED at 274. Hunk #5 FAILED at 283. Hunk #6 FAILED at 292. Hunk #7 FAILED at 304. Hunk #8 FAILED at 312. 8 out of 8 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/sysfs/file.c.rej
I was about to backport it but I find it's not that trivial... Help would be appreciated.
- vin
| |