linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question

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: <20090115235318.f728454e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:53:18 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	hooanon05@...oo.co.jp
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	mhalcrow@...ibm.com, ecryptfs-devel@...ts.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:42:31 +0900 hooanon05@...oo.co.jp wrote:

> Andrew Morton:
> > > +	atomic_inc_return(&lower_dentry->d_inode->i_count);
> > > +	atomic_inc_return(&lower_inode->i_count);
> > 
> > atomic_inc() would suffice here, yes?
> 
> I thought that ..._return() is smp safe and necessary here.
> Because lower_inode may be touched by lower fs (outside of ecryptfs).

atomic_inc() is fully atomic too.  atomic_inc_return() is "special",
in that it does an atomic_inc(), but also returns the result of that
increment to the caller.
--
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/