Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261710AbUKPJ4C (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2004 04:56:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261675AbUKPJxd (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2004 04:53:33 -0500 Received: from mail.euroweb.hu ([193.226.220.4]:19178 "HELO mail.euroweb.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261368AbUKPJwu (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2004 04:52:50 -0500 To: arjan@infradead.org CC: torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org In-reply-to: <1100598372.2811.21.camel@laptop.fenrus.org> (message from Arjan van de Ven on Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:46:13 +0100) Subject: Re: [PATCH] [Request for inclusion] Filesystem in Userspace References: <1100596704.2811.17.camel@laptop.fenrus.org> <1100598372.2811.21.camel@laptop.fenrus.org> Message-Id: From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:52:42 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 698 Lines: 18 > yes but how do you know the entry is still on the list and valid ? Because, it's always kept on one of two lists: pending and processing. The entry is valid valid because it's "owned" by the caller, it's never freed inside request_send(). > you dropped the lock. A normal code pattern is that you then HAVE > to revalidate the assumptions which you guard by that lock. The lock guards the list not the list element which is being removed. Miklos - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/