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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 09:53:09 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/17] fs: inode per-cpu last_ino allocator Le jeudi 30 septembre 2010 à 07:36 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit : > Le mercredi 29 septembre 2010 à 21:53 -0700, Andrew Morton a écrit : > > > +static unsigned int last_ino_get(void) > > > +{ > > > + static unsigned int last_ino; > > > + > > > + return ++last_ino; > > > +} > > > > This is racy with CONFIG_PREEMPT on some architectures, I suspect. I'd > > suggest conversion to atomic_t with, of course, an explanatory comment ;) > > > In fact this code was OK when I submitted my original patch back in 2008, since it replaced fs/inode.c inode->i_ino = ++last_ino; And this was protected by a surrounding spinlock (spin_lock(&inode_lock); at that time) Even after Nick patches, preemption is still disabled (by two spinlocks... spin_lock(&sb_inode_list_lock); / spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);) So patch 15/17 seems good to me, I re-sign it as-is ;) Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> If it happens preemption is re-enabled later (with future patches), we might need to change last_ino_get() too. Thanks ! -- 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