linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] file as directory

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:	Wed, 23 May 2007 11:24:38 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] file as directory

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 12:09:19PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Right.  After locking vfsmount_lock, mount_dironfile() should recheck
> if there was a race and bail out.

Owww...  Not pretty, that...

> I don't think the filesystem ought to try _creating_ a vfsmount.  I
> imagine, that the fs has already a kernel-internal mounted for this
> kind of stuff, and it just supplies a dentry from that.  The vfsmount
> isn't actually important, but it should be readily available, and it's
> easier to clone from a vfsmount/dentry pair.

I don't get it.  What's the point of that exercise, then?  When do you
create that kernel-internal mount?

> As I said, the superblock should be persistent, so we'll get a stable
> st_dev for multiple mounts.

OK, but then I guess I don't understand the intended use.
-
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/