linux-kernel - Re: Q: NFSD readdir in linux-2.6.28

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:	Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:53:06 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	hooanon05@...oo.co.jp, hch@...radead.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Q: NFSD readdir in linux-2.6.28

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:43:50PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17:00PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > It sounds like the better answer is to just make sure i_mutex is held
> > when nfsd_buffered_readdir() calls back into the provided filldir
> > function (we could do it in the various filldir functions themselves,
> > _if_ they call lookup_one_len(), but I think I prefer it this way --
> > it's simpler). Patch below for comment.
> 
> Umm...  I can live with that, assuming that we don't have callbacks
> that take i_mutex themselves.  AFAICS, everything we call there is
> either obviously not touching i_mutex or is already called while we
> hold i_mutex elsewhere, but I'd appreciate if somebody actually
> tested that sucker for different versions of protocol...

BTW, why mess with taking i_mutex inside the inner loop and not
immediately around it?
--
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/