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

[Cyrill Gorcunov]

[Eric Sandeen - Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 12:51:34PM -0500]
| 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
| 

Thanks for answer

		Cyrill

-
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/