linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] new locking primitive (pulled from fs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 13 Apr 2015 14:37:53 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] new locking primitive (pulled from fs_pin)

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> This thing used to be the locking side of fs/fs_pin.c, but
> IMO it might make sense to separate it from fs_pin completely -
> it could be useful elsewhere...
>
> Comments (and especially suggestions on better names) are welcome...

I don't mind abstracting it out, but I would prefer that it stay local
to fs_pin.c until there's a clear case for using it anywhere else.

Do you really have any usage cases that are interesting? Because quite
frankly, I'm not a fan of the nasty fs-pin code, and I would *not*
want the ideas in there to bleed out anywhere else.

So my gut feel is that it's a good thing to try to abstract out that
mess, but not a good idea to spread it out.

(I do realize that without the cross-file movement, the patch
basically just boils down to abstracting out that "finished_killing()"
into a helper function and little else)

                     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/