lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.4.20pre5aa1
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 08:41:25PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> maybe I'm overlooking something but after a short read it seems you have
> no lock in do_truncate->setattr like for all the other fs, so the
> vmtruncate can run under reads and the i_size can change under you and
> in turn you must always read it with i_size_read using asm, like all the
> other fs, if you're not holding the i_sem (and you certainly aren't
> holding the i_sem that frequently, you don't even for writes). this
> because i_sem is the only lock/sem hold by truncate. Infact I'm unsure
> how you serialize the i_size writes of truncate against the ones from
> writes, that seems problematic too, the i_size could get a value past
> the last block allocated (in turn corrupting the fs). Please double
> check that I'm wrong, thanks.

I think we should take the XFS-specific inode lock around vmtruncate.
Need to double-check with Steve.

-
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: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.116 / U:0.404 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site