linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] file as directory

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 23 May 2007 09:29:18 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] file as directory

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 10:05:21AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > Er...  These mounts might not be propagated, but what about a bind
> > over another instance of such file in master tree?
> 
> So your question is, which mount takes priority on the lookup?  It
> probably should be the propagated real mount, rather than the
> dir-on-file one, shouldn't it?

There might be dragons in that area...
 
> > > I think they should be the same superblock, same dentry.  What would
> > > be the advantage of doing otherwise?
> > 
> > Then you are going to have interesting time with locking in final mntput().
> 
> Final mntput of what?

When the last reference to your mount goes away.
 
> > BTW, what about having several links to the same file?  You have i_mutex
> > on the inode, so serialization of those is not a problem, but...
> 
> Sorry, I lost it...

Say /foo/bar/a is such a file.

cd /foo/bar
ln a b

now do lookups on a/ and b/

What happens?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/