linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/18] new API for FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS/FS_IOC

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: <CAJfpeguTt+0099BE6DsVFW_jht_AD8_rtuSyxcz=r+JAnazQGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 8 Feb 2021 09:25:22 +0100
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...nel.org>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
        Mike Marshall <hubcap@...ibond.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@...il.com>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Tyler Hicks <code@...icks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] new API for FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS/FS_IOC_FS[GS]ETXATTR

On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:00 AM Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 04:03:06PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 3:56 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > > But let's talk specifics.  What does CIFS need to contact the server for?
> > > Could it be cached earlier?
> >
> > I don't understand what CIFS is doing, and I don't really care.   This
> > is the sort of operation where adding a couple of network roundtrips
> > so that the client can obtain the credentials required to perform the
> > operation doesn't really matter.  We won't have thousands of chattr(1)
> > calls per second.
>
> Incorrect.

Okay, I was wrong.

Still, CIFS may very well be able to perform these operations without
a struct file.   But even if it can't, I'd still only add the file
pointer as an *optional hint* from the VFS, not as the primary object
as Matthew suggested.

I stand by my choice of /struct dentry/ as the object to pass to these
operations.

Thanks,
Miklos