lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF
Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> [Eric Sandeen - Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 12:17:53PM -0500]
> | Andrew Morton wrote:
> |
> | >Recursive lock_kernel() is OK.
> |
> | Oh, it is? Clearly I am not well versed in the BKL... that's probably a
> | good thing.... :)
> |
> | Ok, let me look into it further. I changed lock_kernel to
> | udf_lock_kernel to complain & backtrace if we re-lock, and it always
> | immediately hung after that; I assumed that was it. I'll investigate
> | further.
> |
> | -Eric
> |
>
> Btw, Andrew is there any way to force kernel to use special UDF module
> instead of compiled-in one? (Sorry for stupid question ;)

Not if it's already built in (at least not with more hackery than it's
worth...) - just rebuild your kernel w/ udf as a module.

BTW my testcase before was bogus, that's not what's causing the lockup.
I'll keep investigating now that I know what *not* to look for. ;-)

-Eric
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-06-01 19:53    [W:0.242 / U:0.304 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site