[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170131125814.GB5298@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 13:58:14 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
hch@....de, Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] fs: Possible filp_open race experiment
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:21:02AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
> -next isn't Linus's tree, sometimes stuff sits in there for years :)
>
> Anyway, if this is a configfs issue, Christoph and Joel can take a look
> at it. Any reason you didn't cc: Joel as well (the MAINTAINERS file is
> your friend...)
It's really a mismatched assumption. The configfs binary file
code just chunks updates up into a buffer, which only gets flushed
at ->release time. If we'd move that to ->flush the issue Marek reports
would be fixed.
But I don't think we want that - triggering a filp_open from the update
of a _binary_ attribute for a start is wrong. And second doing this
using ->fs of a random calling process is bound to cause problems.
I think he is using the wrong kind of interface for the job.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists