Linux kernel 2.6 smbfs bugs
kmshanah at ucwb.org.au
Mon Jan 12 03:32:18 GMT 2004
On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 11:23, Michael B Allen wrote:
> What doesn't Urban Widmark say? Is he still the smbfs maintainer?
I hadn't emailed, but I checked the MAINTAINERS file from the kernel
source and his address is still there. I sent him a copy of my original
> > (I sent this message to the samba list last week, but didn't receive
> > any responses. Probably samba-technical is more appropriate anyway)
> > Has anyone taken a look at these bugs?
> > http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1671
> > http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1732
> No, but just from looking at this now my *guess* is that they are indeed related
> and because it has a timing element something could be getting corrupted because
> the locking isn't right. But this is *total speculation* on my part. For example
> consider the in-situ initializer at the top of smb_readdir:
> struct smb_sb_info *server = server_from_dentry(dentry);
> This hasn't changed since 2.4 but 2.6 now has a lock_kernel() *after* this. If the
> locking semantics have changed in such a way that initialization needs to be moved
> into the critical section this is the kind of thing that could cause a problem.
> Based on what I know about the kernel this probably isn't really the problem but I
> can still make wild guesses :-)
I created the attached patch against 2.6.1, but this still gets the same
oops. I've only got a vague idea of what I'm doing here, but I think
that should rule out the above as a problem.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 1947 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20040112/3efd6d7a/smbfs-locking.bin
More information about the samba-technical