lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.0-test9 and sleeping function called from invalid context
Andrew Morton wrote:

>What protects against concurrent execution of proc_pid_lookup() and
>proc_task_lookup()? I think nothing, because one is at /proc/42 and the
>other is at /proc/41/42; the parent dir inodes are different. hmm.
>
>
Ugs.
/proc/1 and /proc/1/task/1 are two different dentrys.
proc_task_lookup happily overwrites task->proc_dentry. Which means the
task patch broke tsk->proc_dentry.
I think the cure is simple: proc_task_lookup should not write
proc_dentry, only proc_pid_lookup should do that.
tsk->proc_dentry is only used by proc_pid_flush: If a task exits, all
entries below /proc/<pid> are stale, and a shrink_dcache_parent on the
/proc/<pid> dentry recovers the memory.
There is a race between in proc_pid_lookup between checking that the
task is still running and setting tsk->proc_dentry, but AFAICS the race
is not critical: In the worst case, the stale dentries remain around.
They are never returned to user space, d_revalidate prevents that.

--
Manfred


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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.103 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site