On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 23:43 +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17:00PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > It sounds like the better answer is to just make sure i_mutex is held > > when nfsd_buffered_readdir() calls back into the provided filldir > > function (we could do it in the various filldir functions themselves, > > _if_ they call lookup_one_len(), but I think I prefer it this way -- > > it's simpler). Patch below for comment. > > Umm... I can live with that, assuming that we don't have callbacks > that take i_mutex themselves. AFAICS, everything we call there is > either obviously not touching i_mutex or is already called while we > hold i_mutex elsewhere, More than that... until commit 14f7dd63, we were holding i_mutex when we called back into those callbacks from nfsd_readdir() itself. We're only reverting to a fairly recent behaviour, in that respect. > > (While I'm staring at it, it looks like nfsd_buffered_readdir() should > > be returning a __be32 not an int, and its 'return -ENOMEM' should be > > 'return nfserrno(-ENOMEM)'. The first bug I inherited from the existing > > nfsd_do_readdir() when I replaced it, but the second is all my own. I'll > > send a patch to fix those shortly.) > > Fold it into this one, please. OK. Ah, and see also commit 05f4f678b (Bruce). -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx Intel Corporation -- 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
