[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260205235351.GU3183987@ZenIV>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 23:53:51 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, audit@...r.kernel.org,
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>,
Ricardo Robaina <rrobaina@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] audit: Avoid excessive dput/dget in audit_context
setup and reset paths
On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 11:45:17PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> @@ -70,6 +74,8 @@ void chroot_fs_refs(const struct path *old_root, const
> struct>
> count++;
> path_get(new_root);
> }
> + count += fs->pwd_xrefs;
> + fs->pwd_xrefs = 0;
> write_sequnlock(&fs->seq);
Nope - you only need that for threads that have ->pwd equal to old_root.
Incidentally, I'd forgotten about that sucker - it kills the idea of
fdget-like tricks dead, more's the pity. Third-party modification of
task->fs->pwd (under task->lock and task->fs->seq), possible even with
task->fs->users == 1.
FWIW, I'm going through the fs_struct uses at the moment; will post
whatever I get when I go down (or earlier, in the unlikely case it doesn't
spill to tomorrow morning), will keep posting incremental followups
until the documentation is done. I'm sick and tired of half-finished
docs - let's see if I can push through that one this way ;-/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists