linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs/kernfs: Fix lockdep warning in kernfs

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]

Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2022 08:28:03 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        syzbot+2fdf66e68f5f882c1074@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/kernfs: Fix lockdep warning in kernfs_active()

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 07:20:55PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 08:11:34AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 07:00:52PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Shouldn't:
> > > 	https://lore.kernel.org/r/Y0SwqBsZ9BMmZv6x@slm.duckdns.org fix this
> > > instead?
> > 
> > The difference is around whether the id based lookup can see hidden files or
> > not. But yeah, it makes more sense to hide it.
> 
> So your patch should not have been applied to my tree?  And I should
> take this one instead?

Oh, sorry. The patch you took is the better one and I was confused when I
was looking at this patch. No action necessary. It was just me being
confused.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun