On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 17:50 +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 05:41:03PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > > > >From my reading of that code looks like it's been rmdir'ed. And no, I > > don't understand what the hell is that code trying to do. > > > > Ian, could you describe the race you are talking about? > > BTW, this stuff is definitely broken regardless of mount - if something > had the directory in question opened before that rmdir and we'd hit > your lookup_unhashed while another CPU had been in the middle of > getdents(2) on that opened descriptor, we'll get > > vfs_readdir() grabs i_mutex > vfs_readdir() checks that it's dead > autofs4_lookup_unhashed() calls iput() Can this really happen, since autofs4_lookup_unhashed() is only called with the i_mutex held. > inode is freed > vfs_readdir() releases i_mutex - in already freed struct inode. But it could happen later. So it's academic I guess. > > Hell, just getdents() right *after* dentry->d_inode = NULL will oops, > plain and simple. Yeah, I'll look into why I believed I needed to turn the dentry negative. I'll need to keep the dentry positive through out this process. Ian -- 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
