From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e1.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id mB1KotC6031365 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2008 15:50:55 -0500 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id mB1KpOnG163908 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2008 15:51:24 -0500 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id mB1Kower011758 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2008 15:50:58 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC v10][PATCH 08/13] Dump open file descriptors From: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: <493447DD.7010102@cs.columbia.edu> References: <1227747884-14150-1-git-send-email-orenl@cs.columbia.edu> <1227747884-14150-9-git-send-email-orenl@cs.columbia.edu> <20081128101919.GO28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <1228153645.2971.36.camel@nimitz> <493447DD.7010102@cs.columbia.edu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:51:19 -0800 Message-Id: <1228164679.2971.91.camel@nimitz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Oren Laadan Cc: Al Viro , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Serge Hallyn , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" List-ID: On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 15:23 -0500, Oren Laadan wrote: > Verifying that the size doesn't change does not ensure that the table's > contents remained the same, so we can still end up with obsolete data. With the realloc() scheme, we have virtually no guarantees about how the fdtable that we read relates to the source. All that we know is that the n'th fd was at this value at *some* time. Using the scheme that I just suggested (and you evidently originally used) at least guarantees that we have an atomic copy of the fdtable. Why is this done in two steps? It first grabs a list of fd numbers which needs to be validated, then goes back and turns those into 'struct file's which it saves off. Is there a problem with doing that fd->'struct file' conversion under the files->file_lock? -- 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: email@kvack.org