Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF

From: Eric Sandeen
Date: Fri Jun 01 2007 - 13:51:44 EST


Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
[Eric Sandeen - Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 12:17:53PM -0500]
| Andrew Morton wrote:
| | >Recursive lock_kernel() is OK.
| | Oh, it is? Clearly I am not well versed in the BKL... that's probably a | good thing.... :)
| | Ok, let me look into it further. I changed lock_kernel to | udf_lock_kernel to complain & backtrace if we re-lock, and it always | immediately hung after that; I assumed that was it. I'll investigate | further.
| | -Eric
|

Btw, Andrew is there any way to force kernel to use special UDF module
instead of compiled-in one? (Sorry for stupid question ;)

Not if it's already built in (at least not with more hackery than it's worth...) - just rebuild your kernel w/ udf as a module.

BTW my testcase before was bogus, that's not what's causing the lockup. I'll keep investigating now that I know what *not* to look for. ;-)

-Eric
-
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/