linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] filelock: move file locking definitions to separate header file

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:   Fri, 25 Nov 2022 08:23:45 -0500
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com>,
        Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@...kov.net>,
        Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
        Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@...debyte.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>,
        Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
        Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>, Paulo Alcantara <pc@....nz>,
        Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@...hat.com>,
        Shyam Prasad N <sprasad@...rosoft.com>,
        Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
        Christine Caulfield <ccaulfie@...hat.com>,
        David Teigland <teigland@...hat.com>,
        Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Bob Peterson <rpeterso@...hat.com>,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
        Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...nel.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
        Anna Schumaker <anna@...nel.org>,
        Mark Fasheh <mark@...heh.com>,
        Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
        Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Mike Marshall <hubcap@...ibond.com>,
        Martin Brandenburg <martin@...ibond.com>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, hch@....de,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
        samba-technical@...ts.samba.org, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
        linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com,
        devel@...ts.orangefs.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] filelock: move file locking definitions to separate
 header file

On Fri, 2022-11-25 at 03:48 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 03:59:57PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> 
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/include/linux/filelock.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,428 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +#ifndef _LINUX_FILELOCK_H
> > +#define _LINUX_FILELOCK_H
> > +
> > +#include <linux/list.h>
> > +#include <linux/nfs_fs_i.h>
> 
> Umm... I'd add a comment along the lines of "struct file_lock has
> a BS union by fs type; NFS side of things needs nfs_fs_i.h"
> 

Ok.

> > +struct lock_manager_operations {
> > +	void *lm_mod_owner;
> > +	fl_owner_t (*lm_get_owner)(fl_owner_t);
> 
> Probably take fl_owner_t to some more neutral header...
> 

I left it in fs.h for now. Some of the file_operations prototypes need
that typedef, and I figure that anyone who is including filelock.h will
almost certainly need to include fs.h anyway. We could move it into a
separate header too, but it's probably not worth it.

HCH mentioned years ago though that we should just get rid of fl_owner_t
altogether and just use 'void *'. I didn't do it at the time because I
was focused on other changes, but this might be a good time to change
it.

> > +#define locks_inode(f) file_inode(f)
> 
> Why do we still have that one, anyway?  Separate patch, obviously,
> but I would take Occam's Razor to that entity...
> 

I can spin up a patch to nuke that too. I count only 30 callsites
remaining anyway.

> > +struct files_struct;
> > +extern void show_fd_locks(struct seq_file *f,
> > +			 struct file *filp, struct files_struct *files);
> 
> If anything, that would be better off as fl_owner_t...  Again, a separate
> patch.

I'm not sure what you mean here. This prototype hasn't changed, and is
only called from procfs.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>