[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 02/46] fs: d_validate fixes
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 05:59:55PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 12:53:44PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 08:44:32PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > d_validate has been broken for a long time.
> > >
> > > kmem_ptr_validate does not guarantee that a pointer can be dereferenced
> > > if it can go away at any time. Even rcu_read_lock doesn't help, because
> > > the pointer might be queued in RCU callbacks but not executed yet.
> > >
> > > So the parent cannot be checked, nor the name hashed. The dentry pointer
> > > can not be touched until it can be verified under lock. Hashing simply
> > > cannot be used.
> > >
> > > Instead, verify the parent/child relationship by traversing parent's
> > > d_child list. It's slow, but only ncpfs and the destaged smbfs care
> > > about it, at this point.
> >
> > I'd drop the previous revert patch and just convert the RCU hash
> > traversal straight to the d_child traversal code you introduce here.
> > This is a much better explanation of why the d_validate mechanism
> > needs to be changed, and the revert is really an unnecessary extra
> > step...
> Has to be backported, though.

Backported where? The d_validate() change only got included in .37-rc1.

> Patch that is to be reverted obviously
> adds more brokenness and is a good example that you cannot dget() under
> rcu read protection even if the rest of the surrounding function is
> bugfree. I wouldn't have thought it's a big deal.

Reverting something broken to something already broken just to fix
to the less broken version seems like an unnecessary step. Just
fix the brokenneѕs in a single patch - no need to indirect the real
fix through a revert. One less patch to worry about.


Dave Chinner
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-12-09 01:53    [W:0.164 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site