17 марта 2012 г. 11:32 пользователь Ben Hutchings <[email protected]> написал: > On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 10:14 +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote: >> 17 марта 2012 г. 6:37 пользователь Ben Hutchings <[email protected]> >> написал: >> > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 04:38:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: >> >> 3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me >> >> know. > [...] >> > But we test this before flock->fl_flags & FL_POSIX, which means we >> > don't know whether this lock actually needs to be assigned one of >> > those structures. So it appears that we might report a spurious error >> > if the lock list ends with a mandatory lock. If so, this is >> > relatively harmless but does need to be fixed. >> > >> >> You are right here, thanks for the catch! I will repost the patch asap. > > This has already been merged into Linus's tree, so you need to submit a > patch to apply on top of it. >
I posted two patches: 1) the whole fixed version for the stable tree [PATCH v2] CIFS: Do not kmalloc under the flocks spinlock 2) fixup for mainline [PATCH] CIFS: Fix a spurious error in cifs_push_posix_locks -- Best regards, Pavel Shilovsky. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
