linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: use kobj_completion in ext4_sb

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]

Message-ID: <20130912014813.GA12918@thunk.org>
Date:	Wed, 11 Sep 2013 21:48:13 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>
Cc:	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: use kobj_completion in ext4_sb_info

On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 01:44:13PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> Now that we have the kobj_completion structure available, let's use it
> in ext4.
> 
> Note that we aggregate the del/put/wait_for_completion in one
> kobj_completion_del_and_wait call. Since the kobject isn't used for
> anything while the fs is shutting down and we wait until it's released
> before continuing anyway, this is safe.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>

I don't have a huge objection to this, but given that it's not fixing
a bug, and it's not saving _that_ many lines of code, if you want to
run the first patch through Greg's tree (which is fine with me), I
might wait to merge this patch until 3.13, so it's not obvious that
it's worth dealing with the inter-tree dependency, since it
complicates testing on my end.

Does that sound reasonable?

						- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html