lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Corrupted inode list?

On Mon, 9 Dec 1996, Andrew E. Mileski wrote:

>
> After exhaustive testing, and the loss of several hundred MB of data,
> I can assure everyone that the FAT race fix in v2.1.14 doesn't work :-(
> (this also affects VFAT of course)
>
> To review for anxious readers, three different solutions have been
> posted on linux-kernel for this problem:
> #1 by Benjamin LaHaise - see linux-kernel-digest #635
> #2 by Stephen Tweedie - see linux-kernel-digest #636
> #3 by Stephen Tweedie - see linux-kernel-digest #638
> Solution #2 seems to be incorporated into v2.1.14 now.
>
> I'll try #3 now and report back after wringing it out a while.

Hmmm... I haven't seen #3, but how about the patch below (untested,
against 2.1.14). I investigated the msdos/vfat code a bit more, and
depend/linked only seem to be used when renaming across directories
(explains why most tests don't show the problem).


--- linux/fs/fat/inode.c.orig Mon Dec 9 12:43:05 1996
+++ linux/fs/fat/inode.c Mon Dec 9 12:44:20 1996
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
struct inode *depend, *linked;
struct super_block *sb;

+ lock_inode(inode);
depend = MSDOS_I(inode)->i_depend;
linked = MSDOS_I(inode)->i_linked;
sb = inode->i_sb;
@@ -44,6 +45,7 @@
MSDOS_I(inode)->i_linked = NULL;
}
if (MSDOS_I(inode)->i_busy) fat_cache_inval_inode(inode);
+ unlock_inode(inode);
return;
}
inode->i_size = 0;
@@ -69,6 +71,7 @@
iput(linked);
}
done:
+ unlock_inode(inode);
clear_inode(inode);
}


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.094 / U:8.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site