[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260119092748.GA10125@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 10:27:48 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>,
Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
fsverity@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] fsverity: use a hashtable to find the fsverity_info
On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 10:21:00AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> OK, but since __fsverity_get_info() is just rhashtable_lookup_fast() what
> prevents the CPU from reordering the hash table reads before the S_VERITY
> check? I think you need a barrier in fsverity_get_info() to enforce the
> proper ordering. The matching ordering during setting of S_VERITY is
> implied by cmpxchg used to manipulate i_flags so that part should be fine.
Yes, probably.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists