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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20180119144351.GA11735@fieldses.org> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 09:43:51 -0500 From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org> To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, neilb@...e.de, jack@...e.de, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, darrick.wong@...cle.com, david@...morbit.com, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, clm@...com, jbacik@...com, dsterba@...e.com, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, dhowells@...hat.com, jaltman@...istor.com, krzk@...nel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/19] fs: don't take the i_lock in inode_inc_iversion On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 09:36:34AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > Shrug...we have that problem with the spinlock in place too. The bottom > line is that reads of this value are not serialized with the increment > at all. OK, so this wouldn't even be a new bug. > I'm not 100% thrilled with this patch, but I think it's probably better > not to add the i_lock all over the place, even as an interim step in > cleaning this stuff up. Makes sense to me. I've got no comments on the rest of the series, except that I'm all for it. Thanks for persisting--it turned out to be more involved than I'd imagined! --b.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists