linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/10] On inode::i_count and the usage vs reference count issue

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 24 Feb 2017 18:07:26 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Chris Mason <clm@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        elena.reshetova@...el.com, ishkamiel@...il.com, dwindsor@...il.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/10] On inode::i_count and the usage vs reference
 count issue

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 08:43:30AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Usage counts are common and useful, so for now they should stay as-is
> and if people can came up with a useful primitive for them we can
> consider implementing it.
> 
> Trying to shoe-horn everything into refcount_t is a horrible idea.

Sure; and like I said that is a perfectly fine option. I just wanted to
see how horrible this ended up.