linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] autofs4 - use simple_empty() for empty directory check

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1353083773.2332.40.camel@perseus.themaw.net>
Date:	Sat, 17 Nov 2012 00:36:13 +0800
From:	Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	autofs mailing list <autofs@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs4 - use simple_empty() for empty directory check

On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 07:45 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > +static inline int __simple_empty(struct dentry *dentry)
> > +{
> 
> This seems completely bogus.
> 
> It's a duplicate of the existing fs/libfs.c "simple_empty()" function,
> but without taking the outer lock.
> 
> That kind of code duplication - and doing it in a totally different
> file, and making it look autofs-specific - seems entirely wrong.

Sure, are you recommending I alter the fs/libfs.c functions to add a
function that doesn't have the outer lock, and have simple_empty() call
that, then use it in autofs?

Or are recommending I rework the autofs code?

Ian

--
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/