| To: | Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: Fix f_flags races without the BKL |
| From: | Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:57:06 +0100 |
| Cc: | LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>, bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20081229041352.6bbdf57c@tpl> |
| References: | <20081229041352.6bbdf57c@tpl> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.2.1i |
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 04:13:52AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Accesses to the f_flags field have always involved a read-modify-write
> operation, and have always been racy in the absence of the BKL. The recent
> BKL-removal work made this problem worse, but it has been there for a very
> long time. The race is quite small, and, arguably, has never affected
> anybody, but it's still worth fixing.
>
> After pondering for a while, I couldn't come up with anything better than a
> global file->f_flags mutex. There's no point in bloating struct file with
> a mutex just for this purpose; it's hard to imagine that there will be any
> real contention for this lock.
Rather than open coded mutex how about adding a few helpers to
set and clear the flags and hide locking there?
Not that your patch looks invasive..
Sam
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RFC: Fix f_flags races without the BKL, Jonathan Corbet |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RFC: Fix f_flags races without the BKL, Oleg Nesterov |
| Previous by Thread: | RFC: Fix f_flags races without the BKL, Jonathan Corbet |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: Fix f_flags races without the BKL, Jonathan Corbet |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |