linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/12] xfs: remove XFS_TRANS

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]

Message-ID: <20190624225904.GB7777@dread.disaster.area>
Date:   Tue, 25 Jun 2019 08:59:04 +1000
From:   Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     "Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@....com>,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] xfs: remove XFS_TRANS_NOFS

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 07:52:47AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Instead of a magic flag for xfs_trans_alloc, just ensure all callers
> that can't relclaim through the file system use memalloc_nofs_save to
> set the per-task nofs flag.

I'm thinking that it would be a good idea to add comments to explain
exactly what the memalloc_nofs_save/restore() are protecting where
they are used. Right now the XFS_TRANS_NOFS flag is largely
undocumented, so a reader is left guessing as to why the flag is
necessary and what contexts it may apply to. Hence I think we should
fix that while we are changing over to a different GFP_NOFS
allocation context mechanism....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com