lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Subject[PATCH 04/15] afs: Fix missing lock when replacing VL server list
From
Date
When afs_update_cell() replaces the cell->vl_servers list, it uses RCU
protocol so that proc is protected, but doesn't take ->vl_servers_lock to
protect afs_start_vl_iteration() (which does actually take a shared lock).

Fix this by making afs_update_cell() take an exclusive lock when replacing
->vl_servers.

Fixes: 0a5143f2f89c ("afs: Implement VL server rotation")
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
---

fs/afs/cell.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/afs/cell.c b/fs/afs/cell.c
index 9de46116c749..9ca075e11239 100644
--- a/fs/afs/cell.c
+++ b/fs/afs/cell.c
@@ -404,12 +404,11 @@ static void afs_update_cell(struct afs_cell *cell)
clear_bit(AFS_CELL_FL_DNS_FAIL, &cell->flags);
clear_bit(AFS_CELL_FL_NOT_FOUND, &cell->flags);

- /* Exclusion on changing vl_addrs is achieved by a
- * non-reentrant work item.
- */
+ write_lock(&cell->vl_servers_lock);
old = rcu_dereference_protected(cell->vl_servers, true);
rcu_assign_pointer(cell->vl_servers, vllist);
cell->dns_expiry = expiry;
+ write_unlock(&cell->vl_servers_lock);

if (old)
afs_put_vlserverlist(cell->net, old);
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-15 18:26    [W:0.056 / U:9.052 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site