On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 03:00:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Is perhaps the "delayed_call" logic broken, and the symlink is free'd too early? > > That whole set_delayed_call/do_delayed_call thing came in 4.5. Maybe > something broke that logic, and we've executed the delayed freeing > before we should have. > > Normally it's done at terminate_walk() time. But I note that in > walk_component(), we do put_link(nd) which does a do_delayed_call(), > but does *not* do a clear_delayed_call(), so now I think a subsequent > terminate_walk() might drop it *again*. Nope - put_link() also decrements nd->depth. No double calls there... > I'm probably missing something, but I have to say that the old > explicit "put_link()" callback logic was more obvious than the new > delayed calls are. It's not that. It's explicit put_link() in do_last(), followed by ESTALEOPEN and subsequent misbegotten "retry the last step on ESTALEOPEN" looking at now-freed nd->last.name. IOW, the bug predates delayed_call stuff. -- 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
