| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20110719040721.GE31294@dastard> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:07:21 +1000 From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] splice: i_mutex vs splice write deadlock On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:10:03PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > I don't really like this very much. Not taking the i_mutex at all > makes the splice_write method in XFS use different locking than > everyone else, and different from the normal XFS write path. > > For example ocfs2 which has the same locking issues just has an > own implementation of the splice_write method, which isn't > too nice but at least marginally better. I think the right > fix for both xfs and ocfs2 would be to have a generic_file_splice_write > variant that takes an "actor" function pointer, which defaults to > a smaller wrapper around file_remove_suid, file_update_time and > splice_from_pipe_feed, and then XFS and ocfs2 can provide their > own actors that add the additional locking. Yeah I thought about doing that, but wanted to try a simpler version first. I'll code up the actor variant. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists