From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [git pull] more vfs.git stuff Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 21:34:29 +0100 Message-ID: <20130509203428.GI25399@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20130509192655.GG25399@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20130509202815.GH25399@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130509202815.GH25399@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 09:28:15PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > The only place checking that sucker is in a fairly large area protected by > ->b_lock (in mon_bin_event()); I really don't want to dig deep enough to > tell if having it changed right after it had been checked is safe. OTOH, > from a cursory look through that code it appears that the whole map_count > thing is completely misguided - it seems to assume that ->open() is called for > each VMA, including the one created by mmap(2). Sigh... Less cursory one shows that they do call their ->open() from their ->mmap(). OTOH, the code looking and ->mmap_active looks fishy - what happens if we do allocation before mmap() happens? Anyway, let's just drop that commit for now; it clearly needs more RTFS. Could you pull for-linus^?