lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH/RFC 1/2] anon-inodes: Remove fd_install() from anon_inode_getfd()
From
Date
 > If we let the caller call fd_install(), then it may be messed up WRT 
> cleanup (fd, file, inode).

Yes, that is a tiny bit tricky (need to call put_unused_fd() if you
don't install the fd).

> How about removing the inode pointer handout altogether, and *doing*
> fd_install() inside anon_inode_getfd() like:
>
> if (pfile != NULL) {
> get_file(file);
> *pfile = file;
> }
> fd_install(fd, file);
>
> In this way, if the caller want the file* back, he gets the reference
> bumped before fd_install().

I think that may be a bit cleaner than Al's approach, but it still
leaves the same trap that create_vcpu_fd() falls into. The current
code is:

static int create_vcpu_fd(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
int fd, r;
struct inode *inode;
struct file *file;

r = anon_inode_getfd(&fd, &inode, &file,
"kvm-vcpu", &kvm_vcpu_fops, vcpu);
if (r)
return r;
atomic_inc(&vcpu->kvm->filp->f_count);
return fd;
}

and with your proposal, the natural way to write that becomes:

static int create_vcpu_fd(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
int fd, r;

r = anon_inode_getfd(&fd, NULL,
"kvm-vcpu", &kvm_vcpu_fops, vcpu);
if (r)
return r;
atomic_inc(&vcpu->kvm->filp->f_count);
return fd;
}

which still has the same bug.

Maybe a good way to handle this is just to make the get_file() not
optional. I dunno... I feel like we've spent more discussion on this
point than it deserves, so someone should just make a decision and
I'll adapt the ib_uverbs code to work with whatever it is.

- R.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-28 21:27    [W:0.096 / U:0.956 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site