Re: [RFC v10][PATCH 05/13] Dump memory address space

[Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 10:53 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> 
> > +static int cr_ctx_checkpoint(struct cr_ctx *ctx, pid_t pid)
> > +{
> > +     ctx->root_pid = pid;
> > +
> > +     /*
> > +      * assume checkpointer is in container's root vfs
> > +      * FIXME: this works for now, but will change with real containers
> > +      */
> > +     ctx->vfsroot = &current->fs->root;
> > +     path_get(ctx->vfsroot);
> 
> This is going to break as soon as you get another thread doing e.g. chroot(2)
> while you are in there.

Yeah, we do need at least a read_lock(&current->fs->lock) to keep people
from chroot()'ing underneath us.

> And it's a really, _really_ bad idea to take a
> pointer to shared object, increment refcount on the current *contents* of
> said object and assume that dropping refcount on the later contents of the
> same will balance out.

Absolutely.  I assume you mean get_fs_struct(current) instead of
path_get().

-- Dave

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>