[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegvK+v9LZ_VinPAgVV+iuxiVSFqYnX3oRXsBJM8keDgzJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 21:51:50 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/17] VFS: Filesystem information and notifications [ver #17]
On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 9:49 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 08:45:23PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 08:38:44PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 08:37:05PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > >
> > > > You are misreading mntput_no_expire(), BTW - your get_mount() can
> > > > bloody well race with umount(2), hitting the moment when we are done
> > > > figuring out whether it's busy but hadn't cleaned ->mnt_ns (let alone
> > > > set MNT_DOOMED) yet. If somebody calls umount(2) on a filesystem that
> > > > is not mounted anywhere else, they are not supposed to see the sucker
> > > > return 0 until the filesystem is shut down. You break that.
> > >
> > > While we are at it, d_alloc_parallel() requires i_rwsem on parent held
> > > at least shared.
> >
> > Egads... Let me see if I got it right - you are providing procfs symlinks
> > to objects on the internal mount of that thing. And those objects happen
> > to be directories, so one can get to their parent that way. Or am I misreading
> > that thing?
>
> IDGI. You have (in your lookup) kstrtoul, followed by snprintf, followed
> by strcmp and WARN_ON() in case of mismatch? Is there any point in having
> stat(2) on "00" spew into syslog? Confused...
The WARN_ON() is for the buffer overrun, not for the strcmp mismatch.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists