Re: is it right involving cap->session_caps without lock protection in the two functions ?

["Yan, Zheng" <zyan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Oct 30, 2018, at 18:10, ? ? <Mr.liuxuan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello:

         Recently, we have encountered a kernel dead question, and the reason we analyses vmcore dmesg is that list_add_tail(&cap->session_caps) in

__ceph_remove_cap has wrong,since &cap->session_cap is NULL!

so we analyses codes with cap->session_caps operaions,

We found these two functions involving cap - > session_cap operations, but there is no lock protection.

(1) cleanup_cap_releases

(2) ceph_send_cap_releases

SO, we want to ask you,whether there is a cap > session_caps operation exception in multithreading without locking or is it right code to operate cap->session_caps in these two functions  without lock protection? and why if right?

There are protected by s_cap_lock. Which version of kernel do you use?

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com