linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC] inode.i_opflags - Usage of two different locking schemes

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, 5 Mar 2021 11:04:25 -0500
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Alexander Lochmann <alexander.lochmann@...dortmund.de>
Cc:     Horst Schirmeier <horst.schirmeier@...dortmund.de>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] inode.i_opflags - Usage of two different locking schemes

On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 04:35:47PM +0100, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
> 
> 
> On 05.03.21 16:18, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > 1)  I don't see where i_opflags is being read in ipc/mqueue.c at all,
> > either with or without i_rwsem.
> > 
> It is read in fs/dcache.c

So why is this unique to the mqueue inode then?  It might be helpful
to have explicit call stacks in the e-mail, in text form, when you
resend to LKML.

That's because the HTML file is ***huge*** (1.7Meg), and I'm having
trouble with my browser properly rendering it.  In any case, the html
claims to be showing the counter examples and I'm still stuck on the
*example*?

Cheers,

					- Ted