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  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]
Date:	Sat, 13 Dec 2014 09:06:45 -0500
From:	Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@...marydata.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@...marydata.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	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 Fri, 12 Dec 2014 16:59:52 +0000
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 06:54:08AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> 
> > > Umm...  I would be very surprised if it turned out to be a problem.
> > > nfsd really doesn't give a fuck about its cwd and root - not in the
> > > thread side of things.  And (un)exporting is (a) not on a hot path
> > > and (b) not done from a kernel thread anyway.  fh_to_dentry and friends
> > > doesn't care about root/cwd, etc.
> > > 
> > > I don't see anything that could cause that kind of issues.
> > 
> > I like the change overall -- it would certainly make my patch series
> > simpler, but what about pathwalking? We do take the fs->lock in
> > unlazy_walk. Is it possible we'd end up with more contention there?
> 
> That would take a pathname lookup in kernel thread side of nfsd that
> 	* isn't single-component
> 	* isn't LOOKUP_ROOT one (i.e. vfs_path_lookup() or file_open_root())
> and I would really hope we don't have such things.  Any such a beast would
> allow probing the tree layout outside of what we export, to start with...
> 
> AFAICS, we really don't have anything of that sort.  Note that e.g.
> lookup_one_len() doesn't go anywhere near ->fs->lock...

Ahh right. Ok, then I don't see any issue with this so far. Maybe worth
letting it stew in -next once -rc1 ships? Thanks! 

Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...marydata.com>
--
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