On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Umm... I really wonder if we *want* filp_close() under any kind of
> locks. You are right - it should not be deferred. I haven't finished
> checking the callers of that puppy, but if we really do it while holding
> any kind of lock, we are asking for trouble. So I'd rather switch
> filp_close() to use of fput_nodefer() if that turns out to be possible.
Ok, fair enough, looks like a reasonable plan to me.
Linus
--
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
