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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans