Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "ext3_journal_stop".
Did you mean:
__ext3_journal_stop
2003 Mar 20
2
[Patch] ext3_journal_stop inode access
Hi Andrew,
The patch below addresses the problem we were talking about earlier
where ext3_writepage ends up accessing the inode after the page lock has
been dropped (and hence at a point where it is possible for the inode to
have been reclaimed.) Tested minimally (it builds and boots.)
It makes ext3_journal_stop take an sb, not an inode, as its final
parameter. It also sets sb->s_need_sync_fs, not sb->s_dirt, as setting
s_dirt was only ever a workaround for the lack of a proper sync-fs
mechanism.
Btw, we clear s_need_sync_fs in sync_filesystems(). Don't we also need
to do the same in fsync_sup...
2002 Dec 15
0
[patch] ext3 use-after-free bugfix
...t3_dec_count(handle, inode);
iput(inode);
@@ -465,7 +468,6 @@ static int ext3_create (struct inode * d
inode->i_fop = &ext3_file_operations;
inode->i_mapping->a_ops = &ext3_aops;
err = ext3_add_nondir(handle, dentry, inode);
- ext3_mark_inode_dirty(handle, inode);
}
ext3_journal_stop(handle, dir);
return err;
@@ -490,7 +492,6 @@ static int ext3_mknod (struct inode * di
if (!IS_ERR(inode)) {
init_special_inode(inode, mode, rdev);
err = ext3_add_nondir(handle, dentry, inode);
- ext3_mark_inode_dirty(handle, inode);
}
ext3_journal_stop(handle, dir);
return err;
@@...
2001 Mar 28
1
Ext3 and LFS - possible? fatal?
Has anyone tried LFS (ie >2G files support) and Ext3 together?
Are there good reasons why this should/should not work?
I see the RH enterprise kernel patch set specifically does not attempt
both lfs and ext3, but the lfs patches themselves touch some reasonably
localised parts of ext2, so I would hope (without having dived in there
to test), that the ext3 changes would mirror that
2001 Oct 28
4
Extended Attributes and Access Control Lists
Hello,
I have today released an initial version of extended attributes and access
control lists for ext3 (patch against the 2.4.13-ac3 kernel). Eric Jarman
<ejarman@acm.org> has contributed a lot to this effort.
Since I'm not very much into the innards of ext3, can some of you please
take a look at the patch, and see whether it contains any flaws (and tell
me which flaws)? Thanks!
The
2011 Jun 24
10
[PATCH 0/9] remove i_alloc_sem V2
i_alloc_sem has always been a bit of an odd "lock". It''s the only remaining
rw_semaphore that can be released by a different thread than the one that
locked it, and it''s use case in the core direct I/O code is more like a
counter given that the writers already have external serialization.
This series removes it in favour of a simpler counter scheme, thus getting
rid