Patch for a leak of anonymous devices
Hi, Al:
Arjan used your fix from 2.5 which simply moves the allocation of the device. Are you going to change in in 2.4 too? Here's what I did for 2.4.18-pre6 temporarily:
fs/super.c +3 -0
@@ -632,6 +632,9 @@continue ;if (!grab_super (old)) goto retry; +spin_lock (&unnamed_dev_lock); +clear_bit (dev, unnamed_dev_in_use); +spin_unlock (&unnamed_dev_lock);destroy_super (s);return old; }
Another question: your code allows to allocate device (0,0). I assume you found it safe; everything works. However, why is it safe? Do we have no functions that return zero as a device number to indicate a failure?
My moremounts patch simple pre-sets the first bit of the unnamed_dev_in_use bitmap to avoid this. But perhaps I am paranoid here.
-- Pete