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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 18:29:37 -0800 From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...marydata.com>, Bruce Fields <bfields@...ldses.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/16] nfsd/sunrpc: add support for a workqueue-based nfsd On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > Linus, do you see any problems with the following patch (against the mainline)? Not concpetually, but create_kthread() uses CLONE_FS, and I don't think it's just umask that things like nfsd want to avoid sharing. What about all the *other* fields? Just as an example: even if all the threads actually end up all having the same global root, what about contention on 'fs->lock'? I have *not* looked at the details, and maybe there's some reason I'm completely off, but it worries me. Linus -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists