Re: [PATCH v4 11/32] delete_ref_loose(): don't muck around in the lock_file's filename

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 09/14/2014 08:27 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 09/13/2014 09:41 AM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>> Am 06.09.2014 um 09:50 schrieb Michael Haggerty:
>>> It's bad manners.  Especially since, if unlink_or_warn() failed, the
>>> memory wasn't restored to its original contents.
>>
>> I do not see how the old code did not restore the file name. Except for
>> this nit, the patch looks good.
> 
> Hmmmm, you're quite right. I thought I had found some circumstance in
> which unlink_or_warn() could fail to allocate memory and die() or
> something. But I can't find anything like that now.
> 
> I will remove that sentence from the commit message.

I half withdraw my withdrawal. It's true that the failure of
unlink_or_warn() wouldn't cause a problem. But a signal could arrive
while unlink_or_warn() is executing, in which case the signal handler
would see the wrong filename and try to delete the loose reference file,
leaving the lockfile behind.

I will clarify the log message.

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]