2008/1/12, Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 10:36 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 03:44 +0300, Anton Salikhmetov wrote:
> >
> > > +/*
> > > + * Update the ctime and mtime stamps after checking if they are to be
> > > updated.
> > > + */
> > > +void mapped_file_update_time(struct file *file)
> > > +{
> > > + if (test_and_clear_bit(AS_MCTIME, &file->f_mapping->flags)) {
> > > + get_file(file);
> > > + file_update_time(file);
> > > + fput(file);
> > > + }
> > > +}
> > > +
> >
> > I don't think you need the get/put file stuff here, because
>
> BTW, the reason for me noticing this is that if it would be needed there
> is a race condition right there, who is to say that the file pointer
> you're deref'ing in your test condition isn't a dead one already.
So, in your opinion, is it at all needed here to play with the file reference
counter? May I drop the get_file() and fput() calls from the
sys_msync() function?
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
