linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/filemap: Add folio_lock

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAD=FV=UE=4-oR5hvUMt0e1G5a4bbmzcQGPs9LkjTVasWwV4uBA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 Apr 2023 21:55:37 -0700
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/filemap: Add folio_lock_timeout()

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 9:42 PM Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com> wrote:
>
> On 25 Apr 2023 07:19:48 -0700 Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> >
> > So is this an explicit NAK on this approach, then?
>
> Ah I see your point. You misunderstood because I dont think NAk is needed
> in 99.999% cases, given the fact that 1) your patch will never be able to
> escape from standing ovation 2) every mutex_trylock() hints the straws in mind.

I'm afraid I'm still super confused about what you're saying. You
think I should abandon this patch series, or that it might be OK to
continue with it?

-Doug