Re: [PATCH 2/2] deal with deadlock in d_walk()

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 03:02:59PM +0800, hujianyang wrote:
> On 2015/4/26 18:21, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 03:33:41PM +0800, hujianyang wrote:
> >> From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
> >>
> >> commit ca5358ef75fc69fee5322a38a340f5739d997c10 upstream.
> >>
> >> ... by not hitting rename_retry for reasons other than rename having
> >> happened.  In other words, do _not_ restart when finding that
> >> between unlocking the child and locking the parent the former got
> >> into __dentry_kill().  Skip the killed siblings instead...
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
> >> Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
> >> [hujianyang: Backported to 3.10 refer to the work of Ben Hutchings in 3.2:
> >>  - As we only have try_to_ascend() and not d_walk(), apply this
> >>    change to all callers of try_to_ascend()
> >>  - Adjust context to make __dentry_kill() apply to d_kill()]
> >> Signed-off-by: hujianyang <hujianyang@huawei.com>
> >> ---
> >>  fs/dcache.c |  102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> >>  1 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Can you provide a version for 3.14-stable as well?
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> > 
> > .
> > 
> 
> Hi Greg,
> 
> Sorry for my delay.
> 
> Here is the patch for 3.14-stable. Since we have 'd_walk()' in 3.14-stable, we
> could just apply changes as same as original patch and do not need to apply Ben's
> fix, commit 20defcec264c from 3.2.y.
> 
> Thanks!
> Also thanks for the help from Ben!
> 
> Hu

Great, thanks for this, now queued up.

greg k-h