linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] netfs: release the folio lock and put the folio before retrying

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <459eec8a5cd41316aedbff6287900cd92ff92b52.camel@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 05 Jul 2022 09:41:25 -0400
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     xiubli@...hat.com, idryomov@...il.com, vshankar@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        willy@...radead.org, keescook@...omium.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cachefs@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] netfs: release the folio lock and put the folio
 before retrying

On Tue, 2022-07-05 at 14:21 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > I don't know here... I think it might be better to just expect that when
> > this function returns an error that the folio has already been unlocked.
> > Doing it this way will mean that you will lock and unlock the folio a
> > second time for no reason.
> 
> I seem to remember there was some reason you wanted the folio unlocking and
> putting.  I guess you need to drop the ref to flush it.
> 
> Would it make sense for ->check_write_begin() to be passed a "struct folio
> **folio" rather than "struct folio *folio" and then the filesystem can clear
> *folio if it disposes of the page?
> 

I'd be OK with that too.
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>