Skip to content

R
raspberrypi-kernel

openeuler / raspberrypi-kernel

通知 13
Star 1
Fork 0
R
raspberrypi-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 22 3月, 2011 32 次提交
  3. 12 3月, 2011 1 次提交
    • T
      NFSv4/4.1: Fix nfs4_schedule_state_recovery abuses · 0400a6b0
      由 Trond Myklebust 提交于 
      nfs4_schedule_state_recovery() should only be used when we need to force
the state manager to check the lease. If we just want to start the
state manager in order to handle a state recovery situation, we should be
using nfs4_schedule_state_manager().

This patch fixes the abuses of nfs4_schedule_state_recovery() by replacing
its use with a set of helper functions that do the right thing.
Signed-off-by: NTrond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
      0400a6b0
  5. 11 3月, 2011 2 次提交
    • A
      NFSv4: remove duplicate clientid in struct nfs_client · 114f64b5
      由 Andy Adamson 提交于 
      Signed-off-by: NAndy Adamson <andros@netapp.com>
Signed-off-by: NTrond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
      114f64b5
    • T
      SUNRPC: Close a race in __rpc_wait_for_completion_task() · bf294b41
      由 Trond Myklebust 提交于 
      Although they run as rpciod background tasks, under normal operation
(i.e. no SIGKILL), functions like nfs_sillyrename(), nfs4_proc_unlck()
and nfs4_do_close() want to be fully synchronous. This means that when we
exit, we want all references to the rpc_task to be gone, and we want
any dentry references etc. held by that task to be released.

For this reason these functions call __rpc_wait_for_completion_task(),
followed by rpc_put_task() in the expectation that the latter will be
releasing the last reference to the rpc_task, and thus ensuring that the
callback_ops->rpc_release() has been called synchronously.

This patch fixes a race which exists due to the fact that
rpciod calls rpc_complete_task() (in order to wake up the callers of
__rpc_wait_for_completion_task()) and then subsequently calls
rpc_put_task() without ensuring that these two steps are done atomically.

In order to avoid adding new spin locks, the patch uses the existing
waitqueue spin lock to order the rpc_task reference count releases between
the waiting process and rpciod.
The common case where nobody is waiting for completion is optimised for by
checking if the RPC_TASK_ASYNC flag is cleared and/or if the rpc_task
reference count is 1: in those cases we drop trying to grab the spin lock,
and immediately free up the rpc_task.

Those few processes that need to put the rpc_task from inside an
asynchronous context and that do not care about ordering are given a new
helper: rpc_put_task_async().
Signed-off-by: NTrond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
      bf294b41
  7. 10 3月, 2011 3 次提交
  9. 08 3月, 2011 1 次提交
    • A
      unfuck proc_sysctl ->d_compare() · dfef6dcd
      由 Al Viro 提交于 
      a) struct inode is not going to be freed under ->d_compare();
however, the thing PROC_I(inode)->sysctl points to just might.
Fortunately, it's enough to make freeing that sucker delayed,
provided that we don't step on its ->unregistering, clear
the pointer to it in PROC_I(inode) before dropping the reference
and check if it's NULL in ->d_compare().

b) I'm not sure that we *can* walk into NULL inode here (we recheck
dentry->seq between verifying that it's still hashed / fetching
dentry->d_inode and passing it to ->d_compare() and there's no
negative hashed dentries in /proc/sys/*), but if we can walk into
that, we really should not have ->d_compare() return 0 on it!
Said that, I really suspect that this check can be simply killed.
Nick?
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
      dfef6dcd
  11. 05 3月, 2011 1 次提交