lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] umount versus iprune
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> wrote:
> >
> > When prune_icache coincides with unmounting, invalidate_inodes notices
> > the inode it's working on as busy but doesn't wait: Self-destruct in 5
> > seconds message, and later iput oopses on freed super_block.
>
> Is 2.4 affected?

Good question.

I had thought obviously not, 2.4 prune_icache doesn't __iget and
drop inode_lock as 2.5 does (while invalidating buffers and pages).
Looks like 2.4 leaves that work to the subsequent dispose_list's
truncate_inode_pages.

But that raises the doubt: maybe 2.4 won't get any Self-destruct
message, but when prune_icache calls dispose_list calls clear_inode
and destroy_inode, there could be a reference to freed super_block?

Perhaps there's some other reason why not,
I'll check it out more carefully later.

Hugh

-
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 13:33    [W:0.038 / U:2.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site