From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>
Cc: SCSI development list <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
vaughan <vaughan.cao@oracle.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sg: O_EXCL and other lock handling
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:56:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131031155653.GA16944@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52718713.7050906@interlog.com>
> + struct semaphore or_sem; /* protect co-incident opens and releases */
Seems like this should be a mutex.
> sfds_list_empty(Sg_device *sdp)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
> int ret;
>
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&sdp->sfd_lock, flags);
> + ret = list_empty(&sdp->sfds);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sdp->sfd_lock, flags);
> return ret;
Protecting just a list_empty check with a local will give you racy
results. Seems like you should take the look over the check and the
resulting action that modifies the list. That'd also mean replacing the
wait_event* calls with open coded prepare_wait / finish_wait loops.
> + down(&sdp->or_sem);
> + alone = sfds_list_empty(sdp);
> + if ((flags & O_EXCL) && (O_RDONLY == (flags & O_ACCMODE))) {
> + retval = -EPERM; /* Don't allow O_EXCL with read only access */
> + goto error_out;
> + }
Seems like the pure flags check should move to the beginning of the
function before taking any locks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-31 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-30 22:24 [PATCH v2] sg: O_EXCL and other lock handling Douglas Gilbert
2013-10-31 15:56 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2013-10-31 19:20 ` Douglas Gilbert
2013-11-01 5:14 ` vaughan
2013-11-01 5:16 ` vaughan
2013-11-02 18:22 ` Douglas Gilbert
2013-11-03 6:32 ` Vaughan Cao
2013-11-06 15:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-11-06 19:30 ` Douglas Gilbert
2013-11-07 21:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20131031155653.GA16944@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=dgilbert@interlog.com \
--cc=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vaughan.cao@oracle.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).