linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/18] fs: icache remove inode

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 15 Oct 2010 13:52:47 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/18] fs: icache remove inode_lock

Thanks for trying to get back to a technical discussion.  Maybe we
can just move the technical comments to direct replies to the patches
and leave this not very helpful subthread behind?

> rcu_read_lock();
> list_for_each_entry(inode, list) {
>     if (inode->blah ...) {
>       spin_lock(&list_lock);
>       if (unlikely(list_empty(&inode->i_list)))
>         continue;
>       do_something(inode);
>    }
> }

But that't not what we do for icache.  For the validity checking during
lookup we check the I_FREEING bit, which is modified under i_lock
and can be read without any locking.  So everything is just fine
when moving on to RCU locking.

--
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/