Al Viro 7ea600b531 Nest rename_lock inside vfsmount_lock
... lest we get livelocks between path_is_under() and d_path() and friends.

The thing is, wrt fairness lglocks are more similar to rwsems than to rwlocks;
it is possible to have thread B spin on attempt to take lock shared while thread
A is already holding it shared, if B is on lower-numbered CPU than A and there's
a thread C spinning on attempt to take the same lock exclusive.

As the result, we need consistent ordering between vfsmount_lock (lglock) and
rename_lock (seq_lock), even though everything that takes both is going to take
vfsmount_lock only shared.

Spotted-by: Brad Spengler <spender@grsecurity.net>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2013-03-26 18:25:57 -04:00
..
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2012-10-22 08:50:37 +03:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2013-03-26 18:25:57 -04:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2013-02-28 13:21:44 -08:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2012-12-20 18:46:29 -05:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2012-12-11 13:43:42 +09:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00
2012-12-17 17:15:27 -08:00
2013-02-26 02:46:08 -05:00
2013-02-22 23:31:31 -05:00