Re: [PATCH v2] Fix AFFS race condition.

[Jan Kara]

On Mon 14-05-12 12:40:45, Marco Stornelli wrote:
> 2012/5/14 Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>:
> > On Sun 13-05-12 15:44:33, Vladimir 'Ï-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> >> AFFS code preallocates several blocks as an optimisation. Unfortunately
> >> it's not protected by lock so the same blocks may end up allocated twice.
> >> Here is a fix.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ÂThe patch looks good to me now. Thanks! You can add:
> > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > ÂAl, will you merge this patch through your tree? AFFS does not seem to
> > have a maintainer so you are a default fallback...
> >
> > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ÂHonza
> >
> 
> I don't know the AFFS code, so only a question. Instead to use a spin
> lock, I think we can use a simple mutex. Or is the spin lock
> mandatory?
  So what would be an advantage of a mutex? Spinlock *is* the simple locking
variant...

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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/