| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20090417225306.GO26366@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:53:06 +0100 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> Cc: hooanon05@...oo.co.jp, hch@...radead.org, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Q: NFSD readdir in linux-2.6.28 On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:43:50PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:17:00PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > It sounds like the better answer is to just make sure i_mutex is held > > when nfsd_buffered_readdir() calls back into the provided filldir > > function (we could do it in the various filldir functions themselves, > > _if_ they call lookup_one_len(), but I think I prefer it this way -- > > it's simpler). Patch below for comment. > > Umm... I can live with that, assuming that we don't have callbacks > that take i_mutex themselves. AFAICS, everything we call there is > either obviously not touching i_mutex or is already called while we > hold i_mutex elsewhere, but I'd appreciate if somebody actually > tested that sucker for different versions of protocol... BTW, why mess with taking i_mutex inside the inner loop and not immediately around it? -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists