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  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]
Date:	Thu, 3 Apr 2014 11:24:00 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <>
To:	Tejun Heo <>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
	Li Zefan <>,
	Linux Containers <>,
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] cgroup changes for v3.15-rc1

On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Linus Torvalds
<> wrote:
> And the "bool *new_sb_created" argument really makes *zero* sense to
> kernfs_mount(). It was added to fix a namespace refcount leak, BUT

Let me clarify that: the only reason I can see for why you'd care
about whether a new sb has been created is because the new sb needs a
namespace refcount.

Now, *if* there is some other reason to care, then the
"new_sb_created" argument may make sense even for kernfs_mount(). I
just don't see it. But if I'm wrong about that, then my alternate
resolution is wrong. However, as far as I can tell, anything else
should be properly refcounted by the mounting logic, and the "ns"
parameter is the only thing that needs to be handled by the caller
because it has that stupid opaque pointer that doesn't know its own

Could that perhaps be fixed? If kernfs_mount_ns() could just do the
proper "grab" on the "void *ns" directly, all of the stupid
"new_sb_created" crud could just go away, even for kernfs_mount_ns().

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists