lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [ 10/41] CIFS: Do not kmalloc under the flocks spinlock
    From
    17 марта 2012 г. 11:32 пользователь Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> написал:
    > On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 10:14 +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
    >> 17 марта 2012 г. 6:37 пользователь Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> написал:
    >> > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 04:38:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
    >> >> 3.2-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
    > [...]
    >> > But we test this before flock->fl_flags & FL_POSIX, which means we
    >> > don't know whether this lock actually needs to be assigned one of
    >> > those structures.  So it appears that we might report a spurious error
    >> > if the lock list ends with a mandatory lock.  If so, this is
    >> > relatively harmless but does need to be fixed.
    >> >
    >>
    >> You are right here, thanks for the catch! I will repost the patch asap.
    >
    > This has already been merged into Linus's tree, so you need to submit a
    > patch to apply on top of it.
    >

    I posted two patches:
    1) the whole fixed version for the stable tree [PATCH v2] CIFS: Do not
    kmalloc under the flocks spinlock
    2) fixup for mainline [PATCH] CIFS: Fix a spurious error in
    cifs_push_posix_locks

    --
    Best regards,
    Pavel Shilovsky.
    --
    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: 2012-03-17 08:55    [W:0.028 / U:59.436 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site