linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5 -tip] umount

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:	Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:18:17 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@...ware.it>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Fr??d??ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LFSDEV <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 -tip] umount_begin BKL pushdown

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:12:00PM +0200, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
> Push the BKL acquisition from vfs to every specific filesystems
> with hope that it can be eliminated in a second moment.
> 
> The first 4 patches add BKL lock into umount_begin() functions (for
> the filesystems that have this handler). The last one remove
> lock_kernel()/unlock_kernel() from fs/namespace.c (the only point
> that invoke umount_begin() funtcions).

I'd rather collapse all these patches together; no point doing that
per-fs (for all 4 of them).  And CIFS side is bogus.

Another thing: -tip is no place for that.  I can put that into VFS
tree, provided that comments above are dealt with.
--
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/