[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87wmk2lx3s.fsf@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 15:48:07 -0700
From: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: brauner@...nel.org, amir73il@...il.com, hu1.chen@...el.com,
malini.bhandaru@...el.com, tim.c.chen@...el.com, mikko.ylinen@...el.com,
lizhen.you@...el.com, linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] overlayfs: Document critical override_creds()
operations
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> writes:
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 at 03:25, Vinicius Costa Gomes
> <vinicius.gomes@...el.com> wrote:
>>
>> Add a comment to these operations that cannot use the _light version
>> of override_creds()/revert_creds(), because during the critical
>> section the struct cred .usage counter might be modified.
>
> Why is it a problem if the usage counter is modified? Why is the
> counter modified in each of these cases?
>
Working on getting some logs from the crash that I get when I convert
the remaining cases to use the _light() functions.
Perhaps I was wrong on my interpretation of the crash.
Thanks for raising this, I should have added more information about this.
Cheers,
--
Vinicius
Powered by blists - more mailing lists