linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] add lazy_getattr and lazy_readdir patches that defer i

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: <45BF754A.1030307@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:41:46 -0500
From:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>
CC:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dada1@...mosbay.com, dev@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] add lazy_getattr and lazy_readdir patches that defer
 i_ino assignment

Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> Jeff,
> 
> taking into account the discussion about unawarness/uncertainty
> of whether *unique* inode number is needed at all on pipe fds and such
> do we need this at all?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kirill
>

Fair enough, perhaps we should just not worry about it, and assume that there 
might be collisions.

If so, I should probably just have Andrew withdraw the patch I submitted earlier 
to hash the inodes for pipefs. I'll look at other callers of new_inode and fix 
up any of the ones that need fixing.

Does that seem like the most reasonable approach?

-- Jeff
-
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/