On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 01:11:33PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > Hm. Sounds like the same question that the file leases code needs > answered. The important difference is that the leases code can just > refuse to set a lease on inodes with multiple dentries. > > While my mind's on it ... Al, is this code even close to correct? > > if ((arg == F_RDLCK) && (atomic_read(&inode->i_writecount) > 0)) > goto out; > if ((arg == F_WRLCK) > && ((atomic_read(&dentry->d_count) > 1) > || (atomic_read(&inode->i_count) > 1))) > goto out; No. This is complete junk; note that e.g. ls -lR will disrupt it, since lstat(2) will bump dentry refcount. The first part is more or less OK; the second makes no sense. What is it trying to do? Note that the first part also doesn't make a lot of sense, since you could be acquiring a write reference *right* *now*, just as that check passes. And you could finish getting it before you get to do anything else in generic_setlease(). -- 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
