Re: RFC replace some locking of i_sem wiht atomic_t

[Joshua Hudson]

On 4/2/06, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 11:01:30AM -0700, Joshua Hudson wrote:
> > Herein lies the problem with the current locking scheme:
> > 1. rename locks target if it exists, but target may be created by
> > link() immediately
> > after the check&lock procedure.
> > 2. The target of link() is completely unprotected.
>
> 3. You have failed to RTFS or RTFM.
>
Ah here we are

directory-locking.txt shows link() does:
lock parent
insure that source is not a directory
lock source

Let me guess, parent means parent of target, not parent of source.
This has been confusing me for months. Thanks for streightning me out.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/