linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Fix up the NFS mmap code

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: <20100109013825.GD30528@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:38:25 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Fix up the NFS mmap code

On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 05:17:14PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> >
> > How about something like the following. I chose to wrap the call to
> > do_mmap_pgoff() instead of making a special ->pre_mmap(), since that
> > seems more consistent with the way we handle ->read() and ->write().
> 
> I still don't think that you can ever do mmap _and_ readdir on the same 
> inode, so there's something wrong with the lockdep annotations.

readdir() is certainly a red herring.  write(), OTOH, is quite real.
And there we do i_mutex followed by pagefaults.

I *REALLY* dislike Trond's solution, though.

Could we please get a sane expalanation of the reasons why nfs mmap
wants i_mutex in the first place?  Before we add yet another hook
from hell and complicate already overcomplicated area...
--
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/