lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Set MS_ACTIVE in isofs_fill_super()
From
Date
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 12:39 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Russ Weight <rweight@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > This patch sets the MS_ACTIVE bit in isofs_fill_super() prior to calling
> > iget() or iput(). This eliminates a race condition between mount
> > (for isofs) and kswapd that results in a system panic.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Russ Weight <rweight@us.ibm.com>
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.12-rc1/fs/isofs/inode.c 2005-03-17 17:34:36.000000000
> > -0800
> > +++ linux-2.6.12-rc1-isofsfix/fs/isofs/inode.c 2005-03-22
> > 15:29:51.945607217 -0800
> > @@ -820,6 +820,7 @@
> > * the s_rock flag. Once we have the final s_rock value,
> > * we then decide whether to use the Joliet descriptor.
> > */
> > + s->s_flags |= MS_ACTIVE;
> > inode = isofs_iget(s, sbi->s_firstdatazone, 0);
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -909,6 +910,7 @@
> > kfree(opt.iocharset);
> > kfree(sbi);
> > s->s_fs_info = NULL;
> > + s->s_flags &= ~MS_ACTIVE;
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
>
> The patch is obviously safe enough, but seems a bit kludgy.
>
> The basic problem here appears to be that isofs is doing iget/iput in
> ->fill_super before MS_ACTIVE is set and the inode freeing code
> (generic_forget_inode) doesn't expect that to happen, yes?

Yes.

> I wonder if it would make more sense for all the ->fill_super callers to
> set MS_ACTIVE prior to calling ->fill_super(), and clear MS_ACTIVE if
> fill_super() failed?

It does seem a bit kludgy. I was trying keep the changes in isofs
specific code, and this seemed the best way to do it.

When you say "all the ->fill_super callers", are you referring to the
fill_super functions for all filesystems? Or just callers to
isofs_fill_super()?

isofs_fill_super() is called by get_sb_bdev(), which is in the generic
filesystem code. get_sb_bdev() receives a pointer as a parameter when it
is called from isofs_get_sb(). To make a change in get_sb_bdev() would
be to affect many (all?) filesystems. This may be the right thing to do
- although it seems a little heavy-weight since the failure hasn't been
reported in other filesystems.



-
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: 2005-04-06 13:31    [W:0.041 / U:27.964 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site