Le Wed, 25 Sep 2013 00:21:27 +0300, Konstantin Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com> a écrit :
Hello, > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:45:17AM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > I'd like to understand why you think protecting these functions w/ > > the _DETACHED check is correct... In kern_event.c, all calls to > > f_detach are followed by knote_drop which will ensure that the knote > > is removed and free, so no more f_event calls will be called on that > > knote.. > > My current belief is that what happens is a glitch in the > kqueue_register(). After a new knote is created and attached, the kq > lock is dropped and then f_event() is called. If the vnode is > reclaimed or possible freed meantime, f_event() seems to dereference > freed memory, since kn_hook points to freed vnode. > > The issue as I see it is that vnode lifecycle is detached from the > knote lifecycle. Might be, only the second patch, which acquires a > hold reference on the vnode for each knote, is really needed. But > before going into any conclusions, I want to see the testing results. Testing looks good with your latest patch. I was able to run a complete poudriere bulk (870 packages). I'm running another bulk to see. If you have other patches to test just ask, I have not updated my packages because there was a change to make gvfsd to ignore some poudriere activity. So I guess it will be harder to see this problem. Many thanks Konstantin, Regards _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
