linux-kernel - Re: [patch 38/52] fs: icache RCU free inodes

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: <20100630085711.GH24712@dastard>
Date:	Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:57:11 +1000
From:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:	npiggin@...e.de
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 38/52] fs: icache RCU free inodes

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:02:50PM +1000, npiggin@...e.de wrote:
> RCU free the struct inode. This will allow:

Rather than what it will allow, what are the constraints this
imposes on allocating and freeing a struct inode?  e.g. XFS embeds
the struct inode in a larger inode structure and does it's own
allocation, caching and freeing of the larger structure outside of
the VFS functionality.

Does this need to be converted to RCU? Do we need to do more
initialisation of the struct inode than we currently do? What
functions/call chains now implicitly require RCU freeing semantics
on the struct inode for safe operation? What else do we need to be
aware of?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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/