Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 05:54:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 05:53:48 -0500 Received: from astrid2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.2]:34052 "EHLO astrid2.nic.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 05:53:37 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 11:23:33 +0000 From: Francois romieu To: Dan Aloni Cc: linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH (2.4)] atomic use count for proc_dir_entry Message-ID: <20001117112333.D839@nic.fr> Reply-To: Francois romieu In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from karrde@callisto.yi.org on Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 10:37:39AM +0200 X-Organisation: Marie's fan club - I Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CPU A: assume de->count = 1 (in de_put) fs/proc/inode.c::44 if (!--de->count) { de->count = 0 CPU B: (in remove_proc_entry) fs/proc/generic.c::577 if (!de->count) fs/proc/generic.c::578 free_proc_entry(de); CPU A: (in de_put) fs/proc/inode.c::45 if (de->deleted) { <-- dereferencing kfreed pointer What does protect us from the preceding if lock_kernel is thrown ? -- Ueimor - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/