linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] dcache: add a new enum type for 'dentry_d_lock

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: <20191115134823.GQ26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 15 Nov 2019 13:48:23 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, yu kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>,
        rafael@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com, mchehab+samsung@...nel.org,
        corbet@....net, tytso@....edu, jmorris@...ei.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        zhengbin13@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
        chenxiang66@...ilicon.com, xiexiuqi@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dcache: add a new enum type for 'dentry_d_lock_class'

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 08:38:13AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 13:16:25 +0000
> Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> > I want to understand the overall situation.  No argument, list_empty()
> > in there is BS, for many reasons.  But I wonder if trying to keep the
> > current structure of the iterator _and_ the use of simple_rmdir()/simple_unlink()
> > is the right approach.
> 
> My guess is that debugfs was written to be as simple as possible.
> Nothing too complex. And in doing so, may have issues as you are
> pointing out. Just a way to allow communications between user space and
> kernel space (as tracefs started out).
> 
> BTW, what do you mean by "can debugfs_remove_recursive() rely upon the
> lack of attempts to create new entries inside the subtree it's trying
> to kill?"

Is it possible for something to call e.g. debugfs_create_dir() (or any
similar primitive) with parent inside the subtree that has been
passed to debugfs_remove_recursive() call that is still in progress?

If debugfs needs to cope with that, debugfs_remove_recursive() needs
considerably heavier locking, to start with.