On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:43:50PM +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, but I'd appreciate if somebody actually > tested that sucker for different versions of protocol... BTW, why mess with taking i_mutex inside the inner loop and not immediately around it? -- 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
