> On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 12:39:07PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I wonder if it would make more sense for all the ->fill_super callers to
> > set MS_ACTIVE prior to calling ->fill_super(), and clear MS_ACTIVE if
> > fill_super() failed?
>
> This sounds like a better solution, although filesy
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 12:39 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Russ Weight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > This patch sets the MS_ACTIVE bit in isofs_fill_super() prior to calling
> > iget() or iput(). This eliminates a race condition between mount
> > (for isofs) and kswapd that results in a system
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 12:39:07PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Russ Weight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This patch sets the MS_ACTIVE bit in isofs_fill_super() prior to calling
> > iget() or iput(). This eliminates a race condition between mount
> > (for isofs) and kswapd that results in a syst
Russ Weight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This patch sets the MS_ACTIVE bit in isofs_fill_super() prior to calling
> iget() or iput(). This eliminates a race condition between mount
> (for isofs) and kswapd that results in a system panic.
>
> Signed-off-by: Russ Weight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> --
This patch sets the MS_ACTIVE bit in isofs_fill_super() prior to calling
iget() or iput(). This eliminates a race condition between mount
(for isofs) and kswapd that results in a system panic.
Signed-off-by: Russ Weight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- linux-2.6.12-rc1/fs/isofs/inode.c 2005-03-17 17:34:
5 matches
Mail list logo