linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 5/5] truncate: Remove unnecessary page release

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: <20101220113239.E56C.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Mon, 20 Dec 2010 11:32:13 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC 5/5] truncate: Remove unnecessary page release

> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:21 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro
> <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >> This patch series changes remove_from_page_cache's page ref counting
> >> rule. page cache ref count is decreased in remove_from_page_cache.
> >> So we don't need call again in caller context.
> >>
> >> Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
> >> Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> >> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
> >> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
> >> ---
> >>  mm/truncate.c |    1 -
> >>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/mm/truncate.c b/mm/truncate.c
> >> index 9ee5673..8decb93 100644
> >> --- a/mm/truncate.c
> >> +++ b/mm/truncate.c
> >> @@ -114,7 +114,6 @@ truncate_complete_page(struct address_space *mapping, struct page *page)
> >>        * calls cleancache_put_page (and note page->mapping is now NULL)
> >>        */
> >>       cleancache_flush_page(mapping, page);
> >> -     page_cache_release(page);       /* pagecache ref */
> >>       return 0;
> >
> > Do we _always_ have stable page reference here? IOW, I can assume
> 
> I think so.
> Because the page is locked so caller have to hold a ref to unlock it.

Hmm...

Perhaps, I'm missing something. But I think  __memory_failure() only lock 
compaund_head page. not all. example.

> 
> > cleancache_flush_page() doesn't cause NULL deref?



--
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/