On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> NAK. Nice catch, the bug is real, but the fix is wrong. For one thing,
> you have missed detach_mnt()/attach_mnt(), so you are not covering
> all places where the sucker might be removed from the list. For another,
> I don't believe that this is the right approach.
>
> The *only* thing we care about is not getting stuck in __lookup_mnt().
Quite frankly, if that's the main issue, then may I suggest aiming to
use a 'hlist' instead of a doubly-linked list? Those have the
advantage that they are NULL-terminated.
Yeah, hlists have some disadvantages too, which might not make them
work in this case, but really, for mnt_hash? hlists are generally
*exactly* what you want for hash lists, because the head is smaller.
And because of the NULL termination rather than having the head used
in the middle of a circular list, you don't get the termination
problems when moving entries across chains.
I did not look whether there was some reason a hlist isn't appropriate
here. Maybe you can tell me. Or go "yeah, a hlist would work nicely".
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
