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: <20110826065857.GC3903@sun>
Date:	Fri, 26 Aug 2011 10:58:57 +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 11:39:31PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 01:34:59AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > > 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).
> 
> Why would you need an extra reference?  All these data structures are
> created dynamically on access and dentry is always available while any
> operation on the inode is in progress so it's guaranteed to be
> available and there's no reason to diddle with reference count.
> Anyways, we can deal with this optimization later, I think.
> 

Hi Tejun, yeah, I somehow missed that you propose to lift up
proc_get_link a bit. Letme try such approach indeed. Thanks!

	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/