Re: [patch 01/13] ecryptfs: add missing lock around notify_change

[Erez Zadok]

In message <20080424114008.353519557@xxxxxxxxxx>, Miklos Szeredi writes:
> From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Caller of notify_change() need to hold i_mutex.
> 
> Compile tested only.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  fs/ecryptfs/inode.c |    2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: vfs-2.6/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c
> ===================================================================
> --- vfs-2.6.orig/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c	2008-04-02 18:47:17.000000000 +0200
> +++ vfs-2.6/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c	2008-04-02 18:49:18.000000000 +0200
> @@ -908,7 +908,9 @@ static int ecryptfs_setattr(struct dentr
>  	if (ia->ia_valid & (ATTR_KILL_SUID | ATTR_KILL_SGID))
>  		ia->ia_valid &= ~ATTR_MODE;
>  
> +	mutex_lock(&lower_dentry->d_inode->i_mutex);
>  	rc = notify_change(lower_dentry, ia);
> +	mutex_unlock(&lower_dentry->d_inode->i_mutex);
>  out:
>  	fsstack_copy_attr_all(inode, lower_inode, NULL);
>  	return rc;

Mike/Miklos,

Why is this patch part of the r/o bind mount 13-part patchset?  It seems to
me that this could go to akpm/Linus right now (w/o waiting for r/o bind
mount debate to conclude).

Ditto for the next one: [patch 02/13] ecryptfs: clean up (un)lock_parent

Thanks,
Erez.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/