On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 23:15 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2016, at 10:50 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 22:06 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hm. I am trying to lock the newly initialized one and that seems to be
> > > holding up
> > > well (but I w
On Jun 11, 2016, at 10:50 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 22:06 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
>>
>> Hm. I am trying to lock the newly initialized one and that seems to be
>> holding up
>> well (but I want 24 hours just to be extra sure).
>> Hn, I just noticed a bug in this, so that'l
On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 22:06 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2016, at 9:33 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 11:41 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> > > On Jun 10, 2016, at 4:55 PM, J . Bruce Fields wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 06:50:33AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Jun 11, 2016, at 9:33 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 11:41 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
>> On Jun 10, 2016, at 4:55 PM, J . Bruce Fields wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 06:50:33AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 00:18 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> On
On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 11:41 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> On Jun 10, 2016, at 4:55 PM, J . Bruce Fields wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 06:50:33AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 00:18 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> > > > On Jun 9, 2016, at 5:01 PM, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> > > >
On Jun 10, 2016, at 4:55 PM, J . Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 06:50:33AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
>> On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 00:18 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
>>> On Jun 9, 2016, at 5:01 PM, Oleg Drokin wrote:
>>>
Currently there's an unprotected access mode check in
nfs4
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 06:50:33AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 00:18 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> > On Jun 9, 2016, at 5:01 PM, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> >
> > > Currently there's an unprotected access mode check in
> > > nfs4_upgrade_open
> > > that then calls nfs4_get_vfs_file wh
On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 00:18 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> On Jun 9, 2016, at 5:01 PM, Oleg Drokin wrote:
>
> > Currently there's an unprotected access mode check in
> > nfs4_upgrade_open
> > that then calls nfs4_get_vfs_file which in turn assumes whatever
> > access mode was present in the state is
On Jun 9, 2016, at 5:01 PM, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Currently there's an unprotected access mode check in nfs4_upgrade_open
> that then calls nfs4_get_vfs_file which in turn assumes whatever
> access mode was present in the state is still valid which is racy.
> Two nfs4_get_vfs_file van enter the sa
Currently there's an unprotected access mode check in nfs4_upgrade_open
that then calls nfs4_get_vfs_file which in turn assumes whatever
access mode was present in the state is still valid which is racy.
Two nfs4_get_vfs_file van enter the same path as result and get two
references to nfs4_file, bu
10 matches
Mail list logo
