linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/8] revoke: inode revoke lock V7

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:	Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:31:49 -0700
From:	corbet@....net (Jonathan Corbet)
To:	Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc:	alan@...hat.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, hch@...radead.org,
	peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/8] revoke: inode revoke lock V7 

This is a relatively minor detail in the rather bigger context of this
patch, but...

> @@ -642,6 +644,7 @@ struct inode {
>  	struct list_head	inotify_watches; /* watches on this inode */
>  	struct mutex		inotify_mutex;	/* protects the watches list */
>  #endif
> +	wait_queue_head_t	i_revoke_wait;

That seems like a relatively hefty addition to every inode in the system
when revoke - I think - will be a fairly rare operation.  Would there be
any significant cost to using a single, global revoke-wait queue instead
of growing the inode structure?

jon
--
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/