linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] fsnotify: decouple mark lock and marks fsobject lock

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110221193239.GA32356@lsanfilippo.unix.rd.tt.avira.com>
Date:	Mon, 21 Feb 2011 20:32:39 +0100
From:	Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@....de>
To:	eparis@...hat.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] fsnotify: decouple mark lock and marks fsobject
	lock

The intro was somehow truncated. It should be:

This patch series removes the dependency between holding the lock of a mark and 
holding the lock of the marks fsobject (inode/vfsmount). 
Right now we have to use the following locking order

1. mark lock
2. inode/vfsmount lock

With these patches only one of both locks are taken at the same time, which 
removes the need for a strict locking order.

These patches depend on patch "inotify: fix race when adding a new watch" sent to lkml
on Feb. 11.

Lino
--
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/