linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] nfs: don't open in ->d

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: <87y5rdirj2.fsf@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date:	Tue, 06 Mar 2012 18:10:57 +0100
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	"Myklebust\, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
Cc:	"viro\@ZenIV.linux.org.uk" <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-fsdevel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"hch\@infradead.org" <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] nfs: don't open in ->d_revalidate

"Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com> writes:

> It makes a big difference to the cache miss case, since not only is the
> entire path looked up again, but the LOOKUP_REVAL flag gets set, which
> forces a full lookup of each component (as opposed to just
> revalidating).

This is not about a cache miss.  It's about a cache hit (positive cached
dentry) but changed inode on the server.

Is this a likely scenario?

Thanks,
Miklos
--
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/