On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 05:36:03PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 05:24:46PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: >> >> Dear Sedat Dilek, >> >> >> >> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 16:50:55 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> >> >> > [ TO/CC char-misc folks ] >> >> > >> >> > The CULPRIT commit [1] due to my git-bisecting is: >> >> > >> >> > commit 585d98e00ba7a5e2abe65f7a1eff631cb612289b >> >> > "char: misc: assign file->private_data in all cases" >> >> > >> >> > After reverting it, my system boots up fine again. >> >> > >> >> > Can someone from the char-misc folks look at that? >> >> >> >> Ok. My understanding is that the misc device registered by >> >> fs/fuse/dev.c:fuse_dev_init() makes the assumption that >> >> file->private_data == NULL when a misc device is opened. But I'm not >> >> sure to fully understand the code flow of the FUSE filesystem. >> >> >> >> And since it doesn't provide its own implementation of the ->open() >> >> operation, the misc infrastructure was leaving the file->private_data >> >> defined to NULL before my patch. >> >> >> >> With my patch, the file->private_data gets assigned unconditionally >> >> (regardless of whether the misc driver provides or does not provide a >> >> ->open() operation) which modifies the unwritten assumption that fuse >> >> was making about the initial value of file->private_data. I believe the >> >> assumption made by fuse over the initial value of this variable is a >> >> bit fragile. >> >> >> >> Maybe the FUSE code needs to be slightly adjusted to not make this >> >> assumption? >> > >> > As the FUSE code was working properly before this change, I think this >> > misc core change needs to be reverted, so I'll go do that in a bit. >> > >> >> Good, sound reasonable. >> >> I was not aware that char-misc and fuse code is so interwoven (hope >> this is the right word). > > The fuse driver is a misc device, so the fuse code depends on the misc > core to work properly, that's the dependancy here. > > I've now reverted this change, thanks again for the report and the quick > determination of the problem. > All this early-testing results sometimes in nice use-cases/test-cases. If I think of the IPC-MSG issue (fakeroot & 'make deb-pkg') I had in -next... I have sent a patch to Linux-Testing-Project to enhance the IPC test-suite. As a goodie I catched a BASHISM bug for dash shell in runltp script :-). I forgot a bug-report for Debian's fakeroot... The shipped DEBUG doc-file is outdated. The harder part is to convince the maintainers that sth. is/went wrong :-). Personally, I am happy when Friday's Linux-Next is "bug-free" for me. - Sedat - > greg k-h -- 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
