Re: [PATCH v2] Fix AFFS race condition.
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
2012/5/14 Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>: > On Mon 14-05-12 12:40:45, Marco Stornelli wrote: >> 2012/5/14 Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>: >> > On Sun 13-05-12 15:44:33, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: >> >> AFFS code preallocates several blocks as an optimisation. Unfortunately >> >> it's not protected by lock so the same blocks may end up allocated twice. >> >> Here is a fix. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@xxxxxxxxx> >> > The patch looks good to me now. Thanks! You can add: >> > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> >> > >> > Al, will you merge this patch through your tree? AFFS does not seem to >> > have a maintainer so you are a default fallback... >> > >> > Honza >> > >> >> I don't know the AFFS code, so only a question. Instead to use a spin >> lock, I think we can use a simple mutex. Or is the spin lock >> mandatory? > So what would be an advantage of a mutex? Spinlock *is* the simple locking > variant... > > Honza > -- None actually, only style, but if there are performance consideration already done, ok it was only a question. :) Marco -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Linux Ext4 Filesystem] [Ecryptfs] [AutoFS] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Yosemite] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux Cachefs] [Reiser Filesystem] [Linux RAID] [Samba] [Video 4 Linux] [Device Mapper] [CEPH Filesystem]