| 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: <20090425104234.3c2ea3b4@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:42:34 +0100 From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> To: npiggin@...e.de Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 01/27] fs: cleanup files_lock On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 11:20:21 +1000 npiggin@...e.de wrote: > Lock tty_files with tty_mutex, provide helpers to manipulate the per-sb > files list, and unexport the files_lock spinlock. This looks half like a backward step to me: It swaps clean method calls for open coded stuff and it adds more random undocumented uses to tty_mutex, which has far too much already. I don't think - file_move(filp, &tty->tty_files); + + mutex_lock(&tty_mutex); + file_list_del(filp); + list_add(&filp->f_u.fu_list, &tty->tty_files); + mutex_unlock(&tty_mutex); is exactly an improvement, nor is - file_move(filp, &tty->tty_files); - check_tty_count(tty, "tty_open"); + mutex_lock(&tty_mutex); + BUG_ON(list_empty(&filp->f_u.fu_list)); + file_list_del(filp); /* __dentry_open has put it on the sb list */ + list_add(&filp->f_u.fu_list, &tty->tty_files); + __check_tty_count(tty, "tty_open"); + mutex_unlock(&tty_mutex); The basic idea looks totally sound but it can use its own lock and there should be helpers so this stuff doesn't have to get open coded. -- 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