Re: [PATCH 3.10] aio: restore locking of ioctx list on removal

[Benjamin LaHaise]

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 05:03:47PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 11:09:02AM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > Commit 36f5588905c10a8c4568a210d601fe8c3c27e0f0
> > "aio: refcounting cleanup" resulted in ioctx_lock not being held
> > during ctx removal, leaving the list susceptible to corruptions.
> > 
> > In mainline kernel the issue went away as a side effect of
> > db446a08c23d5475e6b08c87acca79ebb20f283c "aio: convert the ioctx list to
> > table lookup v3".
> > 
> > Fix the problem by restoring appropriate locking.
> 
> Why can't I just take db446a08c23d5475e6b08c87acca79ebb20f283c instead?
> Does it not work well enough, or is there other issues involved in it
> that would keep it out of stable?
> 
> Also, it seems like the performance increase of that patch would be good
> to have backported, right?

There are several aio patches that have to be applied to -stable, but I've 
just been waiting for some feedback now that they're in Linus' tree for a 
bit before pushing them to -stable.  I'll review which ones are needed 
today and send out a recommended list of patches to apply.

		-ben

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-aio' in
> the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx  For more info on Linux AIO,
> see: http://www.kvack.org/aio/
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@xxxxxxxxx";>aart@xxxxxxxxx</a>

-- 
"Thought is the essence of where you are now."
--
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/