linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] generic_nvram: use inode lock not lock

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070714094837.073f9bae@the-village.bc.nu>
Date:	Sat, 14 Jul 2007 09:48:37 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, viro@....linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] generic_nvram: use inode lock not lock_kernel

> Can we just use generic_file_llseek() in here?  afacit that simply requires
> that i_size have the correct value.  Does it?

Yes.

> Generic_file_llseek() uses file->f_mapping->host->i_mutex which is
> equivalent for this file, but we might as well be consistent.

Last time I used file->f_mapping->host-> for this in another driver Al
Viro asked me to use the f_path sequence instead. So I've always done
that since.

If it is correct to use the other then generic_file_llseek looks fine, if
not perhaps we need generic_device_llseek() ?

Al - there are many clones of these lseek methods - which should we be
using ?
-
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/