All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
Cc: autofs mailing list <autofs@linux.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs4 - remove hashed check in validate_wait()
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 22:08:14 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090607220814.cc7519f6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090608032537.7088.1870.stgit@zeus.themaw.net>

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 11:25:37 +0800 Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote:

> The recent ->lookup() deadlock correction required the directory
> inode mutex to be dropped while waiting for expire completion. We
> were concerned about side effects from this change and one has
> been identified.
> 
> When checking if a mount has already completed prior to adding a
> new mount request to the wait queue we check if the dentry is hashed
> and, if so, if it is a mount point. But, if a mount successfully
> completed while we slept on the wait queue mutex the dentry must
> exist for the mount to have completed so the test is not really
> needed.
> 
> Mounts can also be done on top of a global root dentry, so for the
> above case, where a mount request completes and the wait queue entry
> has already been removed, the hashed test returning false can cause
> an incorrect callback to the daemon. Also, d_mountpoint() is not
> sufficient to check if a mount has completed for the multi-mount
> case when we don't have a real mount at the base of the tree.
> 

I've been scratching my head trying to work out if this is a
needed-in-2.6.30 fix, but all I got was a bald spot.  Help?

  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-08  5:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-08  3:25 [PATCH] autofs4 - remove hashed check in validate_wait() Ian Kent
2009-06-08  5:08 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-06-08  5:23   ` Ian Kent
2009-06-08  5:41     ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-08  5:53       ` Ian Kent
2009-06-08  5:59         ` Ian Kent

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090607220814.cc7519f6.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=autofs@linux.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=raven@themaw.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.