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: <c57b050d-9ed7-9d6b-b1d0-628a197f6ea6@acm.org>
Date:   Tue, 11 Feb 2020 19:27:24 -0800
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     yu kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>, axboe@...nel.dk, ming.lei@...hat.com
Cc:     yi.zhang@...wei.com, zhangxiaoxu5@...wei.com,
        luoshijie1@...wei.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: rename 'q->debugfs_dir' in blk_unregister_queue()

On 2020-02-10 19:51, yu kuai wrote:
> +static struct dentry *blk_prepare_release_queue(struct request_queue *q)
> +{
> +	struct dentry *new = NULL;
> +	char name[DNAME_INLINE_LEN];
> +	int i = 0;
> +
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(q->debugfs_dir))
> +		return q->debugfs_dir;
> +
> +	while (new == NULL) {
> +		sprintf(name, "ready_to_remove_%d", i++);
> +		new = debugfs_rename(blk_debugfs_root, q->debugfs_dir,
> +				     blk_debugfs_root, name);
> +	}
> +
> +	return new;
> +}

What is the behavior of this loop if multiple block devices are being
removed concurrently? Does it perhaps change remove block device removal
from an O(1) into an O(n) operation?

Since this scenario may only matter to syzbot tests: has it been
considered to delay block device creation if the debugfs directory from
a previous incarnation of the block device still exists?

Thanks,

Bart.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ