linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] Allow knfsd to use atomic

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

Message-ID: <7d4eb6d36fe1266620076cfb77394f0cf837acec.camel@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 16:31:47 -0500
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...merspace.com>, Alexander Viro	
 <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara
	 <jack@...e.cz>, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>, NeilBrown
 <neil@...wn.name>,  Olga Kornievskaia <okorniev@...hat.com>, Dai Ngo
 <Dai.Ngo@...cle.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...nel.org>, Mike
 Snitzer	 <snitzer@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] Allow knfsd to use atomic_open()

On Tue, 2025-11-18 at 11:33 -0500, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
> We have workloads that will benefit from allowing knfsd to use atomic_open()
> in the open/create path.  There are two benefits; the first is the original
> matter of correctness: when knfsd must perform both vfs_create() and
> vfs_open() in series there can be races or error results that cause the
> caller to receive unexpected results.  The second benefit is that for some
> network filesystems, we can reduce the number of remote round-trip
> operations by using a single atomic_open() path which provides a performance
> benefit. 
> 
> I've implemented this with the simplest possible change - by modifying
> dentry_create() which has a single user: knfsd.  The changes cause us to
> insert ourselves part-way into the previously closed/static atomic_open()
> path, so I expect VFS folks to have some good ideas about potentially
> superior approaches.
> 
> Thanks for any comment and critique.
> 
> Benjamin Coddington (3):
>   VFS: move dentry_create() from fs/open.c to fs/namei.c
>   VFS: Prepare atomic_open() for dentry_create()
>   VFS/knfsd: Teach dentry_create() to use atomic_open()
> 
>  fs/namei.c         | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c |  8 +++--
>  fs/open.c          | 41 ----------------------
>  include/linux/fs.h |  2 +-
>  4 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)

Nice work, Ben. This looks pretty reasonable to me, and I agree that
using atomic_open is desirable for preventing races.

Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>