linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] fs, proc: Introduce the /proc/<pid>/map

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: <20110825213459.GA1929@sun>
Date:	Fri, 26 Aug 2011 01:34:59 +0400
From:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
	Nathan Lynch <ntl@...ox.com>,
	Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>,
	Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
	LINUXFS-ML <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	containers@...ts.osdl.org, Zan Lynx <zlynx@....org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] fs, proc: Introduce the /proc/<pid>/map_files/ directory v2

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:12:13PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, again.
> 
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:54:26PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Another thing is, I don't really see why we need vm_start, or fd for
> > that matter, in proc_inode at all.  proc_inode is created on the fly
> > only as dentry gets instantiated on demand, which means we always have
> > d_name on hand to tell what the file is supposed to point to.  In
> > fact, the code already uses name_to_int() to extract fd from d_name.
> > Hmmm... well yeah, it actually seems that proc_inode->fd is never used
> > and we can simply remove it.
> 
> Unfortunately, not quite as easy as I expected.  The information still
> seems redundant but it seems we'll need to change
> proc_inode->get_link() to take dentry instead of inode before doing
> away with proc_inode->fd, but, at any rate, I don't think this is a
> big deal one way or the other.
> 

Hohum... picking up an additional reference to dentry might be dangerous
I think. How exactly you imagine we would do that? (without this problem
I guess we indeed may drop or rather not change proc-inode).

	Cyrill
--
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/