linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] configfs: Silence lockdep on mkdir(), rmdir() and configfs_depend

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: <1232977283.4863.79.camel@laptop>
Date:	Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:41:23 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Louis.Rilling@...labs.com
Cc:	Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@...cle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
	swhiteho <swhiteho@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] configfs: Silence lockdep on mkdir(), rmdir() and
 configfs_depend_item()

On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 14:24 +0100, Louis Rilling wrote:

> However configfs_rmdir() and configfs_mkdir() (recursively) lock inodes because
> this is how the VFS works when removing/adding entries under a directory which
> has already lived in the dcache.

Ok, so then I'm not understanding things correctly.

Its not a locking correctness thing, but simply not being able to do it
from the vfs calls because those assume locks held?

Can't you simply punt the work to a worklet once you've created/removed
the non-default group, which can be done from within the vfs callback ?

--
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/