linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/18] fs: rework icount to be a locked variable

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, 15 Oct 2010 20:23:08 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/18] fs: rework icount to be a locked variable

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 11:20:43AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Oh, NAK that - hit send too soon. I forgot - they're are done that
> way because they are under the inode_lock, and iref(), at this point
> in the series, takes the inode_lock. So while it looks weird, it has
> to stay that way otherwise it deadlocks.....

Sounds fine anyway.  I was just wondering why it was done, and
the later extension of the i_lock coverage is reason enough anyway.

--
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/