linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH 4/5] kernfs: Replace per-fs rwsem with hashed rwsems.

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: <YvwdShstDCK+uQ+R@slm.duckdns.org>
Date:   Tue, 16 Aug 2022 12:42:18 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Imran Khan <imran.f.khan@...cle.com>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 4/5] kernfs: Replace per-fs rwsem with hashed
 rwsems.

Hello,

I'm bandwidth constrained right now and can't really shepherd this patchset,
so I'm not gonna ack or nack the series. That said, here are my thoughts
after glancing through it:

* I find the returning-with-rwsem-held interface and usage odd. We return
  with locks held all the time, so that part in itself is fine but how it's
  used in the proposed patch is pretty alien.

* I don't understand why the topo_mutex is needed. What is its relationship
  with rename_lock?

* Can't the double/triple lock helpers loop over the sorted list instead of
  if'ing each case?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun